AnthonyF Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 New England got the ball at the 29 with 2 minutes left and 3 timeouts. The game like it or not was going to be decided then and there. Yes I wanted us to stop them, but should they have scored I wanted it as quick as possible so we get a chance with the ball again and time on the clock. So do we use the timeouts earlier (and give the defense a break or discuss the defense) so we have 1:30 or just let NE use the clock like they did? Point was, the Bills were actually lucky that they still had 51 seconds and a chance for a field goal.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 No. It's impossible to predict the future. Unless it involves the Bills and a nationally televised evening game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glass To The Arson Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 Leodis should have ran it out but... he was running full speed. Just dive down and take the spot regardless of the time. Do we not have faith in the offense that was battered the Patriots D all night? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted September 16, 2009 Author Share Posted September 16, 2009 Leodis should have ran it out but... he was running full speed. Just dive down and take the spot regardless of the time. Do we not have faith in the offense that was battered the Patriots D all night? How about answering the question. The ball was at the 29 yard line and there were 2 minutes left. Watching the seconds tick away, knowing if NE scores we have less and less time to come back is a loser mentality. Once they got the first down and are inside the 20, use the timeouts. If NE scores we need time on the clock. If they don't, the game is over in any case. An aside is how obnoxious, smug and so cocky Belichek was? 2:00 minutes left, down 5 and he kicks deep, knowing they have 3 timeouts and convinced there is no way Buffalo will get a first down. The success rate for on-side kicks is 25%. The smart money is you try the on-side kick and if it does not work you use the 3 timeouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tt34 Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 How about answering the question. The ball was at the 29 yard line and there were 2 minutes left. Watching the seconds tick away, knowing if NE scores we have less and less time to come back is a loser mentality. Once they got the first down and are inside the 20, use the timeouts. If NE scores we need time on the clock. If they don't, the game is over in any case. An aside is how obnoxious, smug and so cocky Belichek was? 2:00 minutes left, down 5 and he kicks deep, knowing they have 3 timeouts and convinced there is no way Buffalo will get a first down. The success rate for on-side kicks is 25%. The smart money is you try the on-side kick and if it does not work you use the 3 timeouts. Actually, the announcers discussed this right before the kickoff and said that the success rate on onside kicks last year was 10%. Don't know if that's true, but 1/10 is a big difference from 1/4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 No. It's impossible to predict the future. Unless it involves the Bills and a nationally televised evening game. wait ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted September 16, 2009 Author Share Posted September 16, 2009 Actually, the announcers discussed this right before the kickoff and said that the success rate on onside kicks last year was 10%. Don't know if that's true, but 1/10 is a big difference from 1/4. I checked and the 10 year result was 25%.... Incredible how difficult it is to find the stat online. Point is with 2:00 minutes to go you have to try and give your team the opportunity for 2 possessions (recover or a 3 and out). There was 2:06 remaining, thus if unsuccessful, there still would have been the 2 minute warning and 2 timeouts to use and if they stopped the Bills they would have gotten the ball back with a timeout. Belichek made the wrong decision, yet got the right result in any case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 How about answering the question. The ball was at the 29 yard line and there were 2 minutes left. Watching the seconds tick away, knowing if NE scores we have less and less time to come back is a loser mentality. Once they got the first down and are inside the 20, use the timeouts. If NE scores we need time on the clock. If they don't, the game is over in any case. An aside is how obnoxious, smug and so cocky Belichek was? 2:00 minutes left, down 5 and he kicks deep, knowing they have 3 timeouts and convinced there is no way Buffalo will get a first down. The success rate for on-side kicks is 25%. The smart money is you try the on-side kick and if it does not work you use the 3 timeouts. Since when is 1 in 4 odds (if true, and I doubt it) smart money? Belichek* was none of the above. As you mention, he had 3 time outs in his pocket. NE* had a 16 minute advantage in TOP and over 400 yards of offense. Brady was hitting and their receivers were catching - the curiosity here is that BUF led in the waning moments. Bellyboy* called the right shots. And I won't fault BUF's time outs...they were made in the heat of the battle, and it's easy to second guess after the final gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tt34 Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 I checked and the 10 year result was 25%.... Incredible how difficult it is to find the stat online. Point is with 2:00 minutes to go you have to try and give your team the opportunity for 2 possessions (recover or a 3 and out). There was 2:06 remaining, thus if unsuccessful, there still would have been the 2 minute warning and 2 timeouts to use and if they stopped the Bills they would have gotten the ball back with a timeout. Belichek made the wrong decision, yet got the right result in any case. Congrats, you know how to use Google. Do you also know how to apply some reasoning to what you read? For example, did you see that the article you got the 25% number from was written in the 2005 season? So, its a bit dated generally and also pre-dates the rule change on stacking players on one side on the kick. Don't let that stand in your way though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JinWPB Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 As a Tueday QB my call would be take a knee in the endzone or bring it out 10 yrds and down it.Then run off three plays to kill the clock.Then take a safety and kick off deep..... end of story ... game, set ,match! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted September 16, 2009 Author Share Posted September 16, 2009 Congrats, you know how to use Google. Do you also know how to apply some reasoning to what you read? For example, did you see that the article you got the 25% number from was written in the 2005 season? So, its a bit dated generally and also pre-dates the rule change on stacking players on one side on the kick. Don't let that stand in your way though. And the odds of kicking it long and forcing a fumble???? Damn that Belichek is a genius since it worked..... Fine, show me the stats.... I am sure it is higher then 10% over the past decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tt34 Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 And the odds of kicking it long and forcing a fumble???? Damn that Belichek is a genius since it worked..... Fine, show me the stats.... I am sure it is higher then 10% over the past decade. I'm not saying that Belichick is a genius, just that if the onside success rate last year was 10% as the MNF crew said, then it's not ridiculous that you kick deep in that spot. Especially, since onside kick and praying for a fumble on the kick return aren't the only possible outcomes. There is a third option where the Bills get the ball somewhere between their 20-30 yard line after the kickoff and then the Pats sell out to stop them from getting a first down -- not entirely unlikely since anyone would guess that the Bills would probably call three straight running plays to burn clock/Pats timeouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwi Bills fan Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 Speaking of timeouts... was it just me or was the last time out that we called questionable? I can't remember the exact details, but there was about a half minute left in the game... our ball... one Time Out. We ran a play and didn't get the first down. As Trent was getting the team ready to line up at the los, we called our last Time Out. (something like 25 seconds left?) Anywho... shouldn't we have just lined up... spiked the ball and ran a play? That way we could've used the last time out to get our field goal squad out there for the winning kick if we were in field goal range? The way they used the last time out, would we even have been able to get our FG team out there in time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewHampshireBillsFan Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 New England got the ball at the 29 with 2 minutes left and 3 timeouts. The game like it or not was going to be decided then and there. Yes I wanted us to stop them, but should they have scored I wanted it as quick as possible so we get a chance with the ball again and time on the clock. So do we use the timeouts earlier (and give the defense a break or discuss the defense) so we have 1:30 or just let NE use the clock like they did? Point was, the Bills were actually lucky that they still had 51 seconds and a chance for a field goal.... Calling TOs when NE had the Ball is certainly a possibility. The problem is then NE can shorten their game and just go for a first down instead of the endzone. They could even run the ball to get 5 or 6 yards on a play. So I think you got to get your defense to stop a team from scoring 6 points from 29 yards out with just over two minutes to go and not give NE* more time to work with. Actually the odds should be pretty good for the defense, over 50%, especially with only 2 minutes left. Of course Brady* is a tough QB to have going against you at that point and you know the refs aren't going to call any holding on NE*, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts