ROSCOE P. COE TRAIN Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 On the lindell 51 yard attempt, It was a 'gut decision" good coaches dont make gut decisions, they make sound decisions based on percentages and experience. this team and organization has a lot of answering to do. one game into 16 and they are making DUMB mistakes. very suspect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 On the lindell 51 yard attempt, It was a 'gut decision" good coaches dont make gut decisions, they make sound decisions based on percentages and experience. this team and organization has a lot of answering to do. one game into 16 and they are making DUMB mistakes. very suspect 29180[/snapback] Then he made the right decision. Lindell had already missed from 10 yards closer and that kick was on the edge of his range in the best circumstances. He played the percentages on the correct side. He probably didn't figure one of his veteran cornerbacks wouldn't be smart enough to knock the ball down on 4th and 14... Putting this on the coach is laughable. There were VERY few questionable decisions made yesterday, especially when compared to the last 3 seasons. stevestojan, we even won a challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YOOOOOO Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 On the lindell 51 yard attempt, It was a 'gut decision" good coaches dont make gut decisions, they make sound decisions based on percentages and experience. this team and organization has a lot of answering to do. one game into 16 and they are making DUMB mistakes. very suspect 29180[/snapback] And knowing what you we all know about Lindell, what makes you think that the percentages were in favor of kicking the FG?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eSJayDee Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 Risk vs Reward, a very prudent decision. You're up by 4, so they need a TD. 1st, what do you think the %ages are to make that kick? W/ a good kicker, they might be slightly greater than 50%. W/ Lindell, let's just say less than 50%. IF it is successful, what have you gained? Well, that winning TD that your opponents just made is now a tying TD. Not trivial granted. However, consider that TD drive would have started from an avg of about the 27 instead of the 15 (about the expected result of a punt from their 33 or 38). That increases the liklihood of success slightly greater (maybe 10% or more) due to both distance & time constraints. Further, you have to consider that if indeed they are successful in scoring a TD, it's also quite likely that there will still be time left on the clock for your drive. So basically, your taking a chance to give you a bit of an extra cushion (already having the tying FG instead of having to make it in the waning seconds) for about 25 yds of field position (a miss gives them the ball at the 40-41; the expected result of a punt would be about the 15). Not worth it in my book. If anything, in hindsight I wonder if going for it on 4th & 7 or whatever it was might not have been more prudent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 Then he made the right decision. Lindell had already missed from 10 yards closer and that kick was on the edge of his range in the best circumstances. He played the percentages on the correct side. He probably didn't figure one of his veteran cornerbacks wouldn't be smart enough to knock the ball down on 4th and 14... Putting this on the coach is laughable. There were VERY few questionable decisions made yesterday, especially when compared to the last 3 seasons. stevestojan, we even won a challenge. 29190[/snapback] But having said that, I did and still do question the wisdom of calling that stevestojan !@#$ing reverse... Actually, looking back, there were a lot of coaching calls I question...but just the calls, not the staff for making them. It WAS, after all, the coaching staff's first game working together...and there were some calls I liked, as well. If they're still pulling the same nonsense after week 10 or so, then I'll be pissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 On the lindell 51 yard attempt, It was a 'gut decision" good coaches dont make gut decisions, they make sound decisions based on percentages and experience. this team and organization has a lot of answering to do. one game into 16 and they are making DUMB mistakes. very suspect 29180[/snapback] He has no answering to do for that decision, it was the correct one. It's so easy to second guess in hindsight...had the D actually done their jobs and stopped Jax on 4th and 15th nobody would be second guessing that decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 But having said that, I did and still do question the wisdom of calling that stevestojan !@#$ing reverse... Actually, looking back, there were a lot of coaching calls I question...but just the calls, not the staff for making them. It WAS, after all, the coaching staff's first game working together...and there were some calls I liked, as well. If they're still pulling the same nonsense after week 10 or so, then I'll be pissed. 29230[/snapback] I agree, to a point. I don't think the reverse was that bad, especially after both guys on the left side of the line COMPLETELY wiffed on their blocks. Execution is just as important as playcalling. Ask Lee Evans, the real reason for the midfield fumble. Put a hat on your guy, ROOKIE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jukester Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 On the lindell 51 yard attempt, It was a 'gut decision" good coaches dont make gut decisions, they make sound decisions based on percentages and experience. 29180[/snapback] MM says himself that it wasn't a "gut decision" but rather one based on sound reasoning. "It's a judgment call and where do you want to give them the ball," said Mularkey. "I really thought our defense, if we could pin them back in there ..., I just felt like our defense had played well all day. Let them continue doing what they did. I went more with my defense than I did on my gut feeling on missing a field goal." So by your own reasoning MM is a good coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 Based on what we all saw in the game up to that point, is Lindell from 51 a better percentage than putting the game in the hands of the #2 ranked defense with Leftwich throwing into the wind? Sweet Lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 Based on what we all saw in the game up to that point, is Lindell from 51 a better percentage than putting the game in the hands of the #2 ranked defense with Leftwich throwing into the wind? Sweet Lord. 29262[/snapback] Or converting a 4th and 14 when your corner has perfect coverage but isn't savvy enough just to knock the ball down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 MM says himself that it wasn't a "gut decision" but rather one based on sound reasoning. "It's a judgment call and where do you want to give them the ball," said Mularkey. "I really thought our defense, if we could pin them back in there ..., I just felt like our defense had played well all day. Let them continue doing what they did. I went more with my defense than I did on my gut feeling on missing a field goal." So by your own reasoning MM is a good coach. 29252[/snapback] The thing is, he didn't Let them continue doing what they did. They went to a 3-2-6 or some other such prevent nonsense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jukester Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 The thing is, he didn't Let them continue doing what they did. They went to a 3-2-6 or some other such prevent nonsense! 29293[/snapback] Totally agree with you. I was just making a point to the other poster regarding his logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_firewall_* Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 the real point is on 3 and 11.... running the ball, why not let Drew go to the EZ? You get catch, a flag or a sack. To add insult to injury we then took a delay of game penalty to give the punter more room. This cowardly, play not to lose approach stinks. what a lame guy we have running things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobblehead Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 the real point is on 3 and 11.... running the ball, why not let Drew go to the EZ? You get catch, a flag or a sack. To add insult to injury we then took a delay of game penalty to give the punter more room. This cowardly, play not to lose approach stinks. what a lame guy we have running things. 29519[/snapback] Maybe 'cuz Jax was expecting it? They had a guy sitting way back for Evans all freaking day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 the real point is on 3 and 11.... running the ball, why not let Drew go to the EZ? You get catch, a flag or a sack. To add insult to injury we then took a delay of game penalty to give the punter more room. This cowardly, play not to lose approach stinks. what a lame guy we have running things. 29519[/snapback] If MM had called a lot of deep passes, you'd be complaining about Drew taking too many sacks. Until McNally gets our offensive line working together as a unit, MM has two choices: either do what he did, or else have the sackfest we've seen ever since Kelly retired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 the real point is on 3 and 11.... running the ball, why not let Drew go to the EZ? You get catch, a flag or a sack. To add insult to injury we then took a delay of game penalty to give the punter more room. This cowardly, play not to lose approach stinks. what a lame guy we have running things. 29519[/snapback] He was trying to run a little clock and get 5-7 yards to make the FG attemptable, but they played it well. The delay of game was to get every second out of them and give Moorman a little more room to pooch the kick and try to down it deep. Both were good calls, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tux of Borg Posted September 14, 2004 Share Posted September 14, 2004 My gut feeling... 4th and 17, run the !@#$ing ball. PAT... go for two. The high percentage play is keeping Lindell off the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts