Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

You can't settle for field goals inside your opponents 10 yard line and expect to win in the playoffs.


Eazy-E

Recommended Posts

Some of you may disagree but 4th and short you need to be going for it when it is do or die and Cam Newton is your quarterback. Even if you fail you have the opposing team backed up in their own end zone with the potential for a safety. 

I can't believe Ron still plays not to lose in the playoffs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We got Shula'd. Could go for it on 4th, or we could just not call terrible plays and have WRs drop easy TDs on the early downs... Rivera's flaw is not firing Shula, otherwise he's very solid. Loyalty over production will end up being his demise unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, thomas96 said:

We got Shula'd. Could go for it on 4th, or we could just not call terrible plays and have WRs drop easy TDs on the early downs... Rivera's flaw is not firing Shula, otherwise he's very solid. Loyalty over production will end up being his demise unfortunately.

Yeah Shula fuging sucked it up but it's Ron's call to settle for a field goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, brandon_87 said:

I agree with this to an extent, being that it IS the playoffs, you kinda gotta go off how your defense is playing, and at that time, the D wasn't doing too well. Wish we had gone for it though

On the first FG that Gano shanked the D had just stuffed the Saints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thomas96 said:

We got Shula'd. Could go for it on 4th, or we could just not call terrible plays and have WRs drop easy TDs on the early downs... Rivera's flaw is not firing Shula, otherwise he's very solid. Loyalty over production will end up being his demise unfortunately.

I hear ya... but it's more WR's dropping TD passes than Shula IMO (at least in this game).  If Clay catches that TD... the game has a completely different complexion.  Really fuged us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PantherNation123 said:

I hear ya... but it's more WR's dropping TD passes than Shula IMO (at least in this game).  If Clay catches that TD... the game has a completely different complexion.  Really fuged us

Yep, that was a HUGE drop only compounded by the fact that Gano then shanked a chip shot and the Saints proceeded to throw a 80 yard TD bomb all within the matter of seconds of game time. Massive swing of events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

Yep, that was a HUGE drop only compounded by the fact that Gano then shanked a chip shot and the Saints proceeded to throw a 80 yard TD bomb all within the matter of seconds of game time. Massive swing of events.

Exactly... simple things like this can completely change games.  If Clay catches that ball (which I have to believe Samuel/Byrd/most other WR's) would, or if Gano makes that FG... we probably are headed to MN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, PantherNation123 said:

I hear ya... but it's more WR's dropping TD passes than Shula IMO (at least in this game).  If Clay catches that TD... the game has a completely different complexion.  Really fuged us

 

8 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yep, that was a HUGE drop only compounded by the fact that Gano then shanked a chip shot and the Saints proceeded to throw a 80 yard TD bomb all within the matter of seconds of game time. Massive swing of events.

It's both. Shula's flaw has long been red zone efficiency, and many of the play calls in the red zone yesterday just made no sense at all. He called a solid game within the 20s but completely fuged it up when it mattered most. Plus yes WR drops which doomed us as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure Rivera dictates a win his mind by how many field goals are accumulate in a game.

We're 7 years into Rivera right?   Things won't change.    This guy coaches like he's in the 80's and we'll continuously be out-coached when it matters most.     Rivera plays for field goals, Payton plays for touchdowns, that's why we lost.

When you play for field goals, you have a tight window.     We could have tied that game if Gano didn't miss the chip in earlier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Zaximus said:

When you play for field goals, you have a tight window.     We could have tied that game if Gano didn't miss the chip in earlier. 

Even worse, we could have won that game on the final drive...even with that intentional grounding :( 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, Zaximus said:

I'm pretty sure Rivera dictates a win his mind by how many field goals are accumulate in a game.

We're 7 years into Rivera right?   Things won't change.    This guy coaches like he's in the 80's and we'll continuously be out-coached when it matters most.     Rivera plays for field goals, Payton plays for touchdowns, that's why we lost.

When you play for field goals, you have a tight window.     We could have tied that game if Gano didn't miss the chip in earlier. 

I use the Denver Broncos with Elway and Shannahan as a prime example . Elway was stuck with Dan Reeves for the longest time , couldnt win the SB until Mike Shannhan came to town . They started winning bowls when they got a more complete team to help a generational QB win . 

Its no suprise either that 99 Rams turned it around after getting a new HC/OC and getting a couple key players in Faulk in Free Agency and Torry Holt in the draft. 

The theme of all of this is that , coaching MATTERS sooo much. And making a more complete team with dangerous weapons on offense especially matters in a  league that in modern times favors offenses rule wise. Rivera and Shula are dinosaurs stuck in the 80s trying and failing to build a historic defense and wasting an incredible QB talent away with poor coaching descions and mediocre skill position talent . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
    • Well, we got our answer on Army today.
×
×
  • Create New...