AnthonyF Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 No idea why we did that... What a ridiculous call. We don't convert and we are in the exact same position of having to stop Houston from our 44 yard line (outside fg range). Thus we have 2 chances, converting 4th down and then if that fails stopping them like we did. The previous three games decided by 3 points or less, our Offence was onb the sidelines to end the game for the last 6:15, 4:20 & 6:22 respectively. I also had a problem with the three plays prior to the punt... We needed first downs not a deep out, which we threw third down. Saw Denver make the right decision with 3 minutes left on 4th down. Plummer threw an int (worse thing that could happen) and that was fine as the decision was the right one... Bad decision, great result.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 We don't convert and we are in the exact same position of having to stop Houston from our 44 yard line (outside fg range). The difference is that, if you don't convert and you do manage to stop them, they punt the ball and we get it inside the 10 yard line most likely. Now you have a 90+ yard field to drive. Instead, we punt and stop them and have good field position. Of course if Houston had run the ball on 3rd down, we would've lost as well, but that's not the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 No idea why we did that... What a ridiculous call. We don't convert and we are in the exact same position of having to stop Houston from our 44 yard line (outside fg range). Thus we have 2 chances, converting 4th down and then if that fails stopping them like we did. The previous three games decided by 3 points or less, our Offence was onb the sidelines to end the game for the last 6:15, 4:20 & 6:22 respectively. I also had a problem with the three plays prior to the punt... We needed first downs not a deep out, which we threw third down. Saw Denver make the right decision with 3 minutes left on 4th down. Plummer threw an int (worse thing that could happen) and that was fine as the decision was the right one... Bad decision, great result.... 843282[/snapback] The only reason it was a bad decision is because the Bills needed a TD, not a FG, to win. Assuming the Texans actually ran the ball 3 straight times (which they should have done) the Bills would have had no timeouts left. Without any TOs it's unlikely the Bills could move the ball all the way downfield and put the ball in the endzone. The punting strategy only worked because the Texans decided to throw the ball on 3rd down, thereby saving the Bills a timeout. If they had only needed a FG it would have been the correct call as 1:30+ is plenty of time to move the ball into FG range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Brady Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 No idea why we did that... What a ridiculous call. We don't convert and we are in the exact same position of having to stop Houston from our 44 yard line (outside fg range). Thus we have 2 chances, converting 4th down and then if that fails stopping them like we did. The previous three games decided by 3 points or less, our Offence was onb the sidelines to end the game for the last 6:15, 4:20 & 6:22 respectively. I also had a problem with the three plays prior to the punt... We needed first downs not a deep out, which we threw third down. Saw Denver make the right decision with 3 minutes left on 4th down. Plummer threw an int (worse thing that could happen) and that was fine as the decision was the right one... Bad decision, great result.... 843282[/snapback] Only problem with your theory is the fact that Houston's punter drops another one inside the 10yardline with under 2 minutes to go. We spent the whole 2nd half pinned back there and I'm glad you aren't the coach. That is why they get paid the big scratch......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted November 20, 2006 Author Share Posted November 20, 2006 Ifs and buts.... It worked. Maybe Shannahan should be fired from Denver... It was the wrong call. At the 38 yard line with first down, we should have made short passes, like the final drive and gotten some first downs. It was the wrong decision. Yes if he dropped another punt inside the 10, that would have been a daunting task. The fact, that we have not once stopped a team in the fourth quarter when we needed the ball back, pretty much tells me it was the wrong decision. It worked, but the wrong call. I'd rather have had 2 chances with 1 coming from 90 yards if it be, then what we did. ABSOLUTELY THE WRONG DECISION. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agilen Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 The fact of the matter is, the _ONLY_ reason that worked is because houston tried a pass on 3rd down, and it went incomplete. I'm willing to bet that TMQ will call out houston for that play...as he always says, sometimes running up the middle for no gain is the best thing to do. Houston didn't do that, and they lost. If Houston didn't have a moronic coaching staff, Jauron would have looked like a fool for punting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted November 20, 2006 Author Share Posted November 20, 2006 Amazing how anyone can support that decision... It worked and that is all we can say. Our defense has not come up big once in the 4th quarter when we need a stop until yesterday. Houston ran roughshod over us and had some nice passing #'s. Even a blind squirell finds a nut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Our defense has not come up big once in the 4th quarter when we need a stop until yesterday. Houston ran roughshod over us and had some nice passing #'s. 843360[/snapback] Houston had 5 possessions in the second half and 5 punts. They totalled just over 100 yards in the half. Pretty consecutive pass records don't mean much when the passes are going for 2-3 yards a pop. I'm not saying I agree with the decision to punt (obviously I don't as I said above) but the Houston O was not running roughshod over the Bills D in the second half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 The difference is that, if you don't convert and you do manage to stop them, they punt the ball and we get it inside the 10 yard line most likely. Now you have a 90+ yard field to drive. Instead, we punt and stop them and have good field position. Of course if Houston had run the ball on 3rd down, we would've lost as well, but that's not the point. 843290[/snapback] Not to be overlooked is Parrish charging a very awkward punt and making a running catch in traffic to save some important yards and preserve field position. Additionally, I agree about the play calling from Houston. That was right out of the Packers book, when Green gashed the Bills defense all the way to the goalline, and then they pass on 1st and 1. Whether the Texans got the 2 yards or not, a run would've forced the Bills to use their final timeout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted November 20, 2006 Author Share Posted November 20, 2006 It worked.... credit where credit is due... But listening to anyone defend it is laughable, the decision was plain wrong!!!! We don't stop Houston and the game would have been over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albany,n.y. Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 It was absolutely the RIGHT decision and if you don't know why, you don't know this Bills team! 1-The odds are better that we can stop them and get the ball back than getting 4 yards on 1 make or break play, that even if we get a 3 & out, we're pinned too deep in our own territory. The Bills needed more than 1 down to put this game on the line. See 2 & think about down & distance. 2-The O-line is a weakness. 4th & 4 is a passing down. That means the O-line has to hold up in an obvios passing/tee off on the QB play. To trust this O-line over our D & our punter's ability is absurd. 3-Our punter is Brian Moorman, one of, if not the best punter in the league. In order for the Bills to have a shot, they needed field position. If they fail on 4th & 4, they're dead. However with Moorman punting, if the D does their job, the Bills have a shot & don't have to go 90 yards in less than 2 minutes. 4-The team needed to score a TD, no matter what. If they go for it, they have 1 down make or break. If they try on 4th 2 things happen: 1-they don't get it, and for all intents & purposes the game is over. 2-they get 1st down, and they still have to score-no guarantee they score just because they got the 1st down. So now by punting, it's Houston's ball, but they have no urgency to score, and your chances are better to get them 3 & out when they're more concerned with clock than scoring. Now imagine if we get the 1st down & score quickly, now Houston has the urgency to score & we have to stop them. Our odds of a 3 & out drop & Houston has a chance to tie or win. Under the scenario we played, we had enough time to win with a 3 & out and would leave Houston with no time to come back at us. The odds favored punting. JP & our O-line would be better served trying to win it with multiple downs (after getting the ball back) than putting it on an all or nothing play. If we had Peyton Manning at QB or Tomlinson at RB, then maybe the odds would have favored going for it. But with THIS TEAM, the odds favored punting. A good coach knows how to put his team, with the players he has, in the best position to win the game. Jauron did that because one size or play call, doesn't fit all (teams) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agilen Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 It was absolutely the RIGHT decision and if you don't know why, you don't know this Bills team! 1-The odds are... 843888[/snapback] What are the odds of any NFL coach calling a pass play on 3rd and 2 even though you are averaging 7 yards a rush? In _any_ sitation that is a bad play call, but especially so when you can use up the other team's last timeout with under 2 minutes to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted November 20, 2006 Author Share Posted November 20, 2006 It was absolutely the RIGHT decision and if you don't know why, you don't know this Bills team! 1-The odds are better that we can stop them and get the ball back than getting 4 yards on 1 make or break play, that even if we get a 3 & out, we're pinned too deep in our own territory. The Bills needed more than 1 down to put this game on the line. See 2 & think about down & distance. 2-The O-line is a weakness. 4th & 4 is a passing down. That means the O-line has to hold up in an obvios passing/tee off on the QB play. To trust this O-line over our D & our punter's ability is absurd. 3-Our punter is Brian Moorman, one of, if not the best punter in the league. In order for the Bills to have a shot, they needed field position. If they fail on 4th & 4, they're dead. However with Moorman punting, if the D does their job, the Bills have a shot & don't have to go 90 yards in less than 2 minutes. 4-The team needed to score a TD, no matter what. If they go for it, they have 1 down make or break. If they try on 4th 2 things happen: 1-they don't get it, and for all intents & purposes the game is over. 2-they get 1st down, and they still have to score-no guarantee they score just because they got the 1st down. So now by punting, it's Houston's ball, but they have no urgency to score, and your chances are better to get them 3 & out when they're more concerned with clock than scoring. Now imagine if we get the 1st down & score quickly, now Houston has the urgency to score & we have to stop them. Our odds of a 3 & out drop & Houston has a chance to tie or win. Under the scenario we played, we had enough time to win with a 3 & out and would leave Houston with no time to come back at us. The odds favored punting. JP & our O-line would be better served trying to win it with multiple downs (after getting the ball back) than putting it on an all or nothing play. If we had Peyton Manning at QB or Tomlinson at RB, then maybe the odds would have favored going for it. But with THIS TEAM, the odds favored punting. A good coach knows how to put his team, with the players he has, in the best position to win the game. Jauron did that because one size or play call, doesn't fit all (teams) 843888[/snapback] 1. Third & 4 we should have been playing 2 down territory and not throw a long out like he did. However you have to be able to make a 4 yard play at midfield, simple as that.... 2. O-line did okay yesterday, have to have your best play prepared for that time and the line has to be expected to hold. 3. Our punter our MVP.... That is sad. We miss on fourth down we still need to stop and 80, 90 or 55 yards.... Have to be able to move the ball with 2 minutes left. We gave up one opportunity (make the 4th down or stop them) or have to stop them by kicking. The fact this was the first time this year we stopped anyone and got the ball back with the game on the line, tells me we were lucky. We could use the same argument about the defence last week and say how great we were stopping Indy the second half. When they needed to kill the clock the last 6:22, they made it look way too easy. What did they have 1 pass? Your points only are validated, because we stopped them. It was the wrong call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albany,n.y. Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 1. is valid, when I defended the punt during the game, I told the people I was watching it with that if they wanted to go for it on 4th down, then they would have run the ball. The fact that they passed on 3rd down, indicates they were always going to punt it. Fact is they trusted the D more than 1 play by the O. Houston is not Indianapolis. When Houston gets Indy's running game, O-line & Peyton Manning, then you can have a better argument why the Bills D can't be trusted to get the ball back-against a team a lot less capable of controlling the clock than Indianapolis. Know your team, know your opponent. We'll never agree, but the results provede me right because what Jauron did, after looking at the odds of success was correct. Jauron's decision was like a gambler who spreads his bets (ie more downs to succeed) as opposed to the guy who goes "all in" You advocate the all in approach, I'm saying with this Bills team against that Houston team, multiple chances at success was the right way to go. I wouldn't be so adamant if I didn't go through this with Petrino during the game. He wanted to go for it & my 1st response was they didn't run on 3rd, they can't go for it 4th & 4. The decision was made on 3rd down to get the 1st down or punt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted November 21, 2006 Author Share Posted November 21, 2006 "Jauron's decision was like a gambler who spreads his bets (ie more downs to succeed) as opposed to the guy who goes "all in" You advocate the all in approach, I'm saying with this Bills team against that Houston team, multiple chances at success was the right way to go." He did go all in, that's where you have it wrong. By punting his only chance was getting a three and out against a team who had gained over 400 yards (albeit a weak second half). Going on fourth down he had 2 chances, making it and continuing the drive with 2 timeouts or stopping them and then having to go further. That is why on third down they should have been consevative and just went for the possession first down with plays like they used the final possession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 "Jauron's decision was like a gambler who spreads his bets (ie more downs to succeed) as opposed to the guy who goes "all in" You advocate the all in approach, I'm saying with this Bills team against that Houston team, multiple chances at success was the right way to go." He did go all in, that's where you have it wrong. By punting his only chance was getting a three and out against a team who had gained over 400 yards (albeit a weak second half). Going on fourth down he had 2 chances, making it and continuing the drive with 2 timeouts or stopping them and then having to go further. That is why on third down they should have been consevative and just went for the possession first down with plays like they used the final possession. 843985[/snapback] The Texans punted every single possession of the second half. All five of them. The possession before the end of the half they a lost fumble (not counting a one play drive where they lost 9 yards). Why wouldn't Jauron have confidence that his defense could stop their offense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCBongo Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 The Texans punted every single possession of the second half. All five of them. The possession before the end of the half they a lost fumble (not counting a one play drive where they lost 9 yards). Why wouldn't Jauron have confidence that his defense could stop their offense? 844030[/snapback] Because the Texans were running through Buffalo like Swiss Cheese. The D did hold, but not until they gave up a ton of yards which led to the terrible field position. D came up HUGE when they needed to the most and that is what good teams do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 Because the Texans were running through Buffalo like Swiss Cheese. The D did hold, but not until they gave up a ton of yards which led to the terrible field position. D came up HUGE when they needed to the most and that is what good teams do. 844129[/snapback] That would make sense if it were remotely true. But it isn't. The Bills almost completely shut the Texans down in the second half. Not only did they punt every series but their total yards on all their drives were 28, 40, 3, 19, and 8 for a grand total of 98 yards and a total of four first downs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted November 21, 2006 Share Posted November 21, 2006 I think it was a bad decision as well. Sure Houston isn't Indy, but the Jets & Lions aren't Indy either and we couldn't get a step on our last defensive possession in those games. As far as the hypothetical scenerio of going for it & not making it: "even if they stop 'em 3&out" - there is no "even if" - either we force the 3&out or the game is over. Much better off taking your shot on 4th&4 which is not a terribly low % play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted November 21, 2006 Author Share Posted November 21, 2006 That would make sense if it were remotely true. But it isn't. The Bills almost completely shut the Texans down in the second half. Not only did they punt every series but their total yards on all their drives were 28, 40, 3, 19, and 8 for a grand total of 98 yards and a total of four first downs. 844135[/snapback] The stupidity amazes me. Yes Houston punted the entire second half, but all they needed was 1 first down, which they got on all their second half drives except 1 (their only three and outs the entire game) prior to that final drive. So they got first downs on 8 of 9 possessions in the game, just needed one more and DJ says we'll stop them this time.... I just finished watching Heroes on NBC and now I know why DJ called a punt... He is the charcter Hiro from the show and can bend the space time continuum.... Thus punts meant nothing.... they needed just needed a first down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts