Gutless Call to Punt

[Kelly the Dog]

2 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

 

Sorry, but you are incorrect.  - they ran the first 2 plays and got a first down.  Then they threw the ball 3 straight times because they had to go 60 yards to win.

 

Give them the ball at the 41 - the 2 runs that netted a first down - now puts them at the Bills 45.  Instead of 60 - you now need about 30 with 2 time outs.  Running the ball probably nets them enough yards and they do not need to throw it at all.

 

I still hate the punt, but to think it did not impact the offensive mindset of the Colts is just wrong.  The difference in field position was massive in the outcome of the game.  It does not make the decision right, but it is a major part of the decision and something the goes into the call.

I stand corrected. You're right. They ran the first two plays. So that strengthens my point even more. Why wouldn't they have done the same thing. Your argument was because  forced them back by the punt it changed their strategy and they would have to go further. Which means MORE passing. But they didn't. The first two plays were runs. 

[BillsFan130]

6 minutes ago, Bills Pimpin' said:

No. But McD knew the QB was Brisset. You think he would have punted if it was Tom Brady? In fact it was Hilton that made the play or it was pick 6 for White.

 

Possibly. He's a very conservative coach. 

And even if it is Brissett. That was the easiest pitch and catch ever. McD got very lucky today

[PolishDave]

2 minutes ago, Bills Pimpin' said:

Damn, I love this post.

 

You should throw him a free BJ.   You the PIMP!

[Captain_Quint]

I'm willing to give McD a pass, because I can tell It'll really piss of Domdab and MrBobby.

[Rochesterfan]

3 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Was Rex decision to punt against MIA last year when season was on the line the right call. It is really a simple yes or no. 

 

Your the one attacking fans because we question a decision of our coach. So just showing your hypocrisy is all

 

 

Rex’s call was wrong because the offenses for both teams had been moving the ball all day.  The Bills offense was their strength for season and in the game.

 

For McDermont- the defense has been the strength and the offense has sucked.  The game was 7-7 with almost no offense.  

 

What I hate about the call is that you are basically playing not to lose and we need the game in both cases, but for Rex you were going away from your strength and playing to your weaker unit.  McDermont played to the stronger of his 2 units.

 

Does not make it right - just different.

[ExiledInIllinois]

1 minute ago, billsfan11 said:

Possibly. He's a very conservative coach. 

And even if it is Brissett. That was the easiest pitch and catch ever. McD got very lucky today

And he was unlucky with starting Peterman against the Chargers.

 

Can we call it a wash?

[Bills Pimpin']

2 minutes ago, PolishDave said:

 

You should throw him a free BJ.   You the PIMP!

???. That's good...

[BillsFan130]

Just now, ExiledInIllinois said:

And he was unlucky with starting Peterman against the Chargers.

 

Can we call it a wash?

No. That was just an awful decision to start him against the chargers lol

[ExiledInIllinois]

Just now, billsfan11 said:

No. That was just an awful decision to start him against the chargers lol

And this decision today was brilliant. It won the game.  

[BillsFan130]

Just now, ExiledInIllinois said:

And this decision today was brilliant. It won the game.  

Lol We'll agree to disagree. I think the bills lose or tie that game 75 percent of the time if he punts. Today, the 25 percent went their way. Doesn't mean it's the right decision to me.

 

But like I said, we'll agree to disagree

[PolishDave]

2 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

And this decision today was brilliant. It won the game.  

 

Or perhaps you could say the Bills won in spite of that decision - which is the more accurate statement.  

[ExiledInIllinois]

Just now, billsfan11 said:

Lol We'll agree to disagree. I think the bills lose or tie that game 75 percent of the time if he punts. Today, the 25 percent went their way. Doesn't mean it's the right decision to me.

 

But like I said, we'll agree to disagree

75% in conditions like this?

 

I put it at winning 75% in these conditions.

 

Can't worry about the tie.  So be that.

[dubs]

Just now, PolishDave said:

 

Or perhaps you could say the Bills won in spite of that decision - which is the more accurate statement.  

 

Or none of the above. 

 

It was a tough call. I was more inclined to see him go for it, but they call worked and ended up being the right call. 

 

I think given the situation and circumstances, it was a defendable if not best decision. But I don’t think it was overwhelmingly better or worse one way or another, like many are making it out to be. 

[Rochesterfan]

4 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

I stand corrected. You're right. They ran the first two plays. So that strengthens my point even more. Why wouldn't they have done the same thing. Your argument was because  forced them back by the punt it changed their strategy and they would have to go further. Which means MORE passing. But they didn't. The first two plays were runs. 

 

Because after the 2 runs - they were at their 25 with 3 minutes left - how many more runs until the game was over - not enough to get a win - so they had to pass.

 

if they had been at the 41 - the 2 runs move them to the Bills 44 with 3 minutes left - plenty of time to continue to run.  I do not believe they ever throw the ball in that case.

 

It completely changes the mindset.  Additionally - if they had been stopped on 1st and 2nd down - my guess is Indy runs it on third down - they wanted to chew a bit of clock and try to win.

 

You see the same thing on the last drives in the first half.  Teams do not get aggressive until they get that first 1st down - then they start to open up the play book.

 

[fansince88]

I was against it.....it worked out.....im over it 

[ExiledInIllinois]

Bills won because of this old-school choice.  Plain and simple.  People are too impatient now, McD didn't let that affect him.

 

The D can score too.  Get fumble.  Going for it was useless in the grand field position scheme.

[Domdab99]

17 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

They still need to get TD for outright win.

 

And yes.  Field position put Bills in best situation to win.  Field position was everything, it was right call.

 

1) There are four minutes left, so if the Bills make the first down and keep the drive alive, they will either a) make a TD and win; b) turn the ball over on downs with the Colts having to go a long way to score with little time left; c) kick a FG with little time left for the Colts to tie or go ahead. 

 

Two of these options will almost guarantee a victory and keep the season alive. One of those will end in a tie, but damned if they didn't try to win it.

 

2) The snow, the field position, Webb at QB, the Colts moving the ball late - all are important factors. But there was really only one factor that mattered:

 

THERE WERE ONLY FOUR MINUTES LEFT IN THE GAME AND THE SEASON. A tie is as good as a loss. Our coach chose to punt the ball in that situation - hoping that everything would break his way and that the Bills would A) get the ball back again with little time left, and B) move the ball in the blizzard and score in that short amount of time left. 

 

It was an asinine decision, pure and simple. 

 

Going for it is literally the only sane decision there. It give you a better chance to win the game.

 

But hey, congrats to McD for closing his eyes and hoping for the best possible outcome.

 

 

[BillsFan130]

4 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

75% in conditions like this?

 

I put it at winning 75% in these conditions.

 

Can't worry about the tie.  So be that.

What do you mean don;t worry about the tie?

 

You understand that if they tied, they would basically be eliminated. Right? That's the main thing I think you are missing here. If the tie helps them then yes punting is smart. But the tie is virtually the same as a loss

[PolishDave]

1 minute ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Bills won because in spite of this old-school choice. 

 

Why do you keep making me fix it for you?

[Teddy KGB]

Just now, Domdab99 said:

 

1) There are four minutes left, so if the Bills make the first down and keep the drive alive, they will either a) make a TD and win; b) turn the ball over on downs with the Colts having to go a long way to score with little time left; c) kick a FG with little time left for the Colts to tie or go ahead. 

 

Two of these options will almost guarantee a victory and keep the season alive. One of those will end in a tie, but damned if they didn't try to win it.

 

2) The snow, the field position, Webb at QB, the Colts moving the ball late - all are important factors. But there was really only one factor that mattered:

 

THERE WERE ONLY FOUR MINUTES LEFT IN THE GAME AND THE SEASON. A tie is as good as a loss. Our coach chose to punt the ball in that situation - hoping that everything would break his way and that the Bills would A) get the ball back again with little time left, and B) move the ball in the blizzard and score in that short amount of time left. 

 

It was an asinine decision, pure and simple. 

 

Going for it is literally the only sane decision there. It give you a better chance to win the game.

 

But hey, congrats to McD for closing his eyes and hoping for the best possible outcome.

 

 

 

☝?☝?Says game is meaningless 

 

posts 75 times about punt ??

16 minutes ago, Captain_Quint said:

I'm willing to give McD a pass, because I can tell It'll really piss of Domdab and MrBobby.

 

Same