BuffOrange Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 And to anyone who said we needed a TD because of Manning....we would still need a 2 pointer to go up by seven. If we miss, we lose anyway. If Indy scores, we get another drive most likely. 834556[/snapback] 7pt lead >>5pt lead>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>2pt lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 7pt lead >>5pt lead>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>2pt lead. 834559[/snapback] Right...but the arguement of how good Manning is...and he's going to lead them to a score for sure.....then even if you get the TD and miss the 2 pointer, that same arguement shold hold in the poster's mind, and Manning will take them down for a TD. The playcall reminds me of something John Kerry would do. The correct thing to do is sitting right in your lap, you've been doing it 95% of the way....and then you get cute and F it all up. It is a reach out of character for the gameplan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Right...but the arguement of how good Manning is...and he's going to lead them to a score for sure.....then even if you get the TD and miss the 2 pointer, that same arguement shold hold in the poster's mind, and Manning will take them down for a TD. No...the argument is that it's 1,000 times easier for the Colts to get a FG than a TD. That's what I'm getting at with the ">'s". The playcall reminds me of something John Kerry would do. The correct thing to do is sitting right in your lap, you've been doing it 95% of the way....and then you get cute and F it all up. It is a reach out of character for the gameplan. 834572[/snapback] I'll just link the play-by-play log and leave it at that. This notion that running draws on 3rd&5 on the 18 was what kept us in the game is a joke. We got our 1st FG by completing passes on 3rd down. The draw play that set up the 3rd FG was NOT REMOTELY CLOSE to the same situation because it was a 3rd&20 and we were on the brink of FG range. This is probably the dumbest debate I've ever taken part in online, no offence or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 in the end jauron abandoned a game plan that had gotten bills into a potential late 4th quarter lead by calling pass on 3rd and 5 from the 20. the one thing they couldnt do in that situation is take a sack and made the go ahead field goal longer. the tackles had been getting lit up on passing plays all day and JP couldn't sense a pass rush with the most sophisticated GPS navigation system. just like clockwork tackle gets beat off the ball, jp has no clue and gets sacked and lindell misses 41 yard field goal. i honestly think if the field goal would have been 35 that lindell makes it. the colts were only able to get 17 points through more than 3 & 1/2 quarters and the best option was to make sure you put the onus on them to score on you. bills didn't need a TD ... they needed FG and going for a TD by calling pass wasn't worth the risk. 833990[/snapback] Yeah, we really should have went for it there. Punting was the wrong call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 No...the argument is that it's 1,000 times easier for the Colts to get a FG than a TD. That's what I'm getting at with the ">'s". I'll just link the play-by-play log and leave it at that. This notion that running draws on 3rd&5 on the 18 was what kept us in the game is a joke. We got our 1st FG by completing passes on 3rd down. The draw play that set up the 3rd FG was NOT REMOTELY CLOSE to the same situation because it was a 3rd&20 and we were on the brink of FG range. This is probably the dumbest debate I've ever taken part in online, no offence or anything. 834578[/snapback] Just like it is 1,000 easier for the Bills to get a FG than a TD. If Bill Bellichek was our coach, and Brady was our QB, I don't mind the call. 6 minutes and you are about to go ahead of the best team in the league. I understand mixing things up, but that is not our style, and our QB has yet to prove he can handle these situations. The only reason Losman didn't fumble there is because he was nailed into the ground with more acceleration than the ball received from gravity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Dick Jauron before he dicks you? 834029[/snapback] Dick Jauron is unbeatable. You can't lick our Dick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted November 13, 2006 Author Share Posted November 13, 2006 lol, you've got to be kidding me...as if we would've won the game 19-17? We've got to go for the TD with that much time on the clock. 834009[/snapback] read this quote from a colts fan Had you all made that FG it may have spelled our 1st loss. 834876[/snapback] that was the game missing that FG. theres a difference between 35 and 41, as a matter of fact the kick that missed would have been good from 35. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 as a matter of fact the kick that missed would have been good from 35. 834898[/snapback] I've read a lot of retarded arguments, but I'm not sure I've seen somebody openly admit they're using blatant hindsight. It's like if a defense committs a post-play foul after a TD, and the offense chooses to assess that foul on the kickoff, and the PAT hits the goalpost....clearly the coach was stupid not to use the penalty yards on the PAT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Brady Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Time to go to bed ,,,,Lindell must make that kick, I don't care if it was 35 or 41 the kick must be made and that is why your argument is foolish at best... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Time to go to bed ,,,,Lindell must make that kick, I don't care if it was 35 or 41 the kick must be made and that is why your argument is foolish at best... 834907[/snapback] Let me tell you why your arguement is foolish. Even if Lindell had made a 70 yard kick and put us up by TWO, it wouldnt have mattered! Manning excels at coming back and winning the game. BTW: What did the Colts offense do right after that kick? Drive 60 yards in 6 minutes with little to no difficulty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted November 13, 2006 Author Share Posted November 13, 2006 lol, you've got to be kidding me...as if we would've won the game 19-17? We've got to go for the TD with that much time on the clock. 834009[/snapback] even coach dungy is talking about the importance of the sack and missed FG. are you saying you know more than he does? http://www.thetimesonline.com/articles/200...224007d2012.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 It was a bizarre call, no question. The colts were salivating to sack, the line (reinforced by the tight ends) was giving jp a two step drop...and all we needed was a field goal. Oh well...live and learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted November 15, 2006 Author Share Posted November 15, 2006 7pt lead >>5pt lead>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>2pt lead. 834559[/snapback] if colts can score 3 then they can probably score 7. theyre either moving the ball or not. in that case best thing is make damn certain you kick the FG and take the lead. instead bills make a huge blunder and call a deep drop with the QB thats been sacked the most in the nfl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Let me tell you why your arguement is foolish. Even if Lindell had made a 70 yard kick and put us up by TWO, it wouldnt have mattered! Manning excels at coming back and winning the game. BTW: What did the Colts offense do right after that kick? Drive 60 yards in 6 minutes with little to no difficulty. 834917[/snapback] There may have been a very different momentum change, had the Colts been NEEDING POINTS, instead of 3.5 yards per play. If the Lindell makes that kick, I do not concede the game. As Hank Bullough would have said: "That missed FG really took the sails out of our wind." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted November 16, 2006 Author Share Posted November 16, 2006 There may have been a very different momentum change, had the Colts been NEEDING POINTS, instead of 3.5 yards per play. If the Lindell makes that kick, I do not concede the game. As Hank Bullough would have said: "That missed FG really took the sails out of our wind." 839272[/snapback] im almost certain with how effective bills running game had been, how easy the FG was from 35 yards and how the colts had heat on JP all day, that the colts were ecstatic when they saw JP take that 7-step drop. its almost as if dungy took over the radiowaves and broadcast the exact play call he wanted to see into JPs headset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PacificCoastBillsFan Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 So let me get this straight, beings a pass play was called, failed, and resulted in a failed 41 yd feild goal........we should have ran the dang ball, should we have failed to pick up the 1st down, resulting in a missed field goal (I cannot assume this would be made either, beings the 41 yd FG was missed, which USUALLY are made in doors.) We would be reading a thread of why we didnt pass the dam ball and how the coaches have no faith in JP and he needs to be benched. So either way second guessing does us no good...... it is what it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted November 17, 2006 Author Share Posted November 17, 2006 So let me get this straight, beings a pass play was called, failed, and resulted in a failed 41 yd feild goal........we should have ran the dang ball, should we have failed to pick up the 1st down, resulting in a missed field goal (I cannot assume this would be made either, beings the 41 yd FG was missed, which USUALLY are made in doors.) We would be reading a thread of why we didnt pass the dam ball and how the coaches have no faith in JP and he needs to be benched. So either way second guessing does us no good...... it is what it is 839512[/snapback] DR. Z AGREES ... TERRIBLE CALL COST BILLS GAME from Dr Z's latest NFL Power Rankings: -------------------- Buffalo Bills (3-6) Freeney sacked Losman to back the Bills up six yards and make the field goal just difficult enough to be missable. Could have won the game and beaten the Colts. And who was it that couldn't keep the NFL's speediest pass rusher out and prevent the sack? Robert Royal, a journeyman TE. Why? Why? Why? I just can't take this much farther. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writ...nks3/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PacificCoastBillsFan Posted November 18, 2006 Share Posted November 18, 2006 DR. Z AGREES ... TERRIBLE CALL COST BILLS GAME from Dr Z's latest NFL Power Rankings: -------------------- Buffalo Bills (3-6) Freeney sacked Losman to back the Bills up six yards and make the field goal just difficult enough to be missable. Could have won the game and beaten the Colts. And who was it that couldn't keep the NFL's speediest pass rusher out and prevent the sack? Robert Royal, a journeyman TE. Why? Why? Why? I just can't take this much farther. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writ...nks3/index.html 840207[/snapback] People are going to see it as they wish to see it. But if you cannot honestly think that with Six minutes left in the game, that field goal would have won the game. A touch down maybe, but not a field goal........If I am not mistaking, the colts drove sixty yards just running out the clock. I with all my heart believe they would have gotten in field goal range in that time if they so needed to. But heck you all look at it the way you wish. But IMHO nothing less than a touch down would have won the game......hind sight is always 20 / 20 and makes it so easy to second guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YardRat Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 The TE Royals was beat on the sack, not Peters. The QB should've recognized the mis-match and checked out of the pass play to a run. If JP isn't allowed to audible (which very well may be the case, I don't know for sure) then he should have burned the last timeout, discussed what he saw with the coaches on the sideline, and went out again on third down with two plays called...one a pass and one a run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts