Talley56 Posted November 15, 2009 Posted November 15, 2009 Not trying to beat a dead horse but anyone else think we should have accepted that holding penalty late in the game when the Titans kicked the field goal? I know we were giving up big chunks of yards on those screen plays on 3rd and long but that late in the game when it is still a one possession ball game I think it's smarter to take the chance, knock them out of field goal range, and try to force the punt on the next play instead of setting a good kicker up to make it a two-possession game. If they convert on the 3rd downl, again, they make it a two-possession ball game either way. At least we would have had a chance to force the punt and get the ball back with the game still at one possession. Maybe then we could have moved the ball without having to force it and throw those two late pick sixes.
Mark Vader Posted November 15, 2009 Posted November 15, 2009 I think it was the right call, the defense had finally stopped them. I had very little confidence that they could stop them if the Titans got a second chance no matter how far back they would have been. Yes they gave up the FG, but it was a 51 yarder, not exactly a chip shot.
silvermike Posted November 15, 2009 Posted November 15, 2009 It was the wrong call, but we weren't going to win again anyway, I suppose.
bills_red Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 I think it was the right call, the defense had finally stopped them. I had very little confidence that they could stop them if the Titans got a second chance no matter how far back they would have been. Yes they gave up the FG, but it was a 51 yarder, not exactly a chip shot. great post!
BTIZZLE Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 Not trying to beat a dead horse but anyone else think we should have accepted that holding penalty late in the game when the Titans kicked the field goal? I know we were giving up big chunks of yards on those screen plays on 3rd and long but that late in the game when it is still a one possession ball game I think it's smarter to take the chance, knock them out of field goal range, and try to force the punt on the next play instead of setting a good kicker up to make it a two-possession game. If they convert on the 3rd downl, again, they make it a two-possession ball game either way. At least we would have had a chance to force the punt and get the ball back with the game still at one possession. Maybe then we could have moved the ball without having to force it and throw those two late pick sixes. They were converting 3rd and longs all day with screens. Hind sight is 20 20 but I don't have a huge problem with it. It is not as bad as the Jets game last year with the end of game management.
TC in St. Louis Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 I think it was one of the most gutless calls I've ever seen. The penalty would've put them out of field goal range, and the defense might have stopped them and forced the punt. As it were, I was certain Bironas would make the kick. And he did. Game over. This team is done. It's got no hope. When your supposed leader doesn't believe that the defense can make a stop, you're done.
47Yards Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 I think it was one of the most gutless calls I've ever seen. The penalty would've put them out of field goal range, and the defense might have stopped them and forced the punt. As it were, I was certain Bironas would make the kick. And he did. Game over. This team is done. It's got no hope. When your supposed leader doesn't believe that the defense can make a stop, you're done. This is a correct summary.
Red Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 I don't know. This is one of those decisions that you can go either way with. Vince Young and Johnson were ripping off 15 yard gains. The D was getting pushed back too far, missing tackles and showing some signs of fatigue. If you give them the ball, I think Jauron saw the signs in our defense, and figured settling for 3 was probably better than allowing the Titans to attempt (and probably convert) for a 1st down/ touchdown. I thought it was odd at the time, and right out of the Jauron-coach-not-to-lose philosophy book. I guess he was thinking do we want to spot them 3 or possibly 7? I personally don't feel you should spot a team any points, but I'm not the coach of the Bills.
VJ91 Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 Not trying to beat a dead horse but anyone else think we should have accepted that holding penalty late in the game when the Titans kicked the field goal? I know we were giving up big chunks of yards on those screen plays on 3rd and long but that late in the game when it is still a one possession ball game I think it's smarter to take the chance, knock them out of field goal range, and try to force the punt on the next play instead of setting a good kicker up to make it a two-possession game. If they convert on the 3rd downl, again, they make it a two-possession ball game either way. At least we would have had a chance to force the punt and get the ball back with the game still at one possession. Maybe then we could have moved the ball without having to force it and throw those two late pick sixes. Of course you accept the penalty and knock them out of field goal range. Especially when their kicker is Baronis, who has a rocket for a leg. But this is DJ we're talking about here. Nothing he does makes sense, and I can't wait until he's gone.
Philly McButterpants Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 I think it was the right call, the defense had finally stopped them. I had very little confidence that they could stop them if the Titans got a second chance no matter how far back they would have been. Yes they gave up the FG, but it was a 51 yarder, not exactly a chip shot. Ditto . . .
Live&DieBillsFootball Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 I think it was one of the most gutless calls I've ever seen. The penalty would've put them out of field goal range, and the defense might have stopped them and forced the punt. As it were, I was certain Bironas would make the kick. And he did. Game over. This team is done. It's got no hope. When your supposed leader doesn't believe that the defense can make a stop, you're done. I totally agree. This to me was the game. As you said, a field goal meant "game over". Why the hell wouldn't you move them back 10 yards? If they get the first down, so be it. You lost anyways. It was the ONLY way for us to stay in the game, and Dick !@#$ed it up. Anything after that field goal was meaningless. The 2 pick sixes after the field goal were like empty net goals. Totally meaningless. And Dick pulls Trent after the first pick. Nothing like making Trent the scapegoat after Dick blows a call.
billieve420 Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 I think it was the right call, the defense had finally stopped them. I had very little confidence that they could stop them if the Titans got a second chance no matter how far back they would have been. Yes they gave up the FG, but it was a 51 yarder, not exactly a chip shot. Normally I would agree but Bironas almost made a 60 yarder before the half and a 50 yd FG is hardly outside his range. Jauron should have accepted the penalty.
Maguire's Beer Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 For his career, Bironas was 8-13 from 50+ before today -- and he was 5-6 from 50+ since 2007. Given that an FG would turn the game into a two-score affair with less than four minutes left, and given that Bironas's chance of making the kick from 51 was probably better than 50/50, they probably should have taken the penalty and tried to stop 'em on D. This is not a team that is capable of scoring twice in 3 minutes at a greater than 50/50 clip.
jad1 Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 I think it was the right call, the defense had finally stopped them. I had very little confidence that they could stop them if the Titans got a second chance no matter how far back they would have been. Yes they gave up the FG, but it was a 51 yarder, not exactly a chip shot. Bironas has made 6 of his last 7 between 50 and 55 yards. Maybe it wasn't exactly a chip shot, but it was as close to a chip shot that Bironas gets. Jauron should have accepted the penalty if just to extend the game. They have a safety who is leading the league in interceptions, and Vince Young isn't exactly in the Manning/Brady league yet. All they needed was a Young incompletion and the Titans were punting with a 7 point lead.
vincec Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 The Titans weren't averaging 10 yards per play, so the percentages say to accept he penalty... especially if you can make Vince Young throw it one more time. Picking him off was always the Bill's best chance.
taterhill Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 it was a HORRIBLE call...to argue otherwise is foolish
apuszczalowski Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 It was another "Damned If you Do, Damned if you Don't" choices. They let them attempt a 50+ yard feild goal, after the kicker already was short on another 50+ yard FG earlier, or you accept the penalty and hope that your defence can stop them from converting, something they couldn't do on the last 3rd and long the Titans had.. There was no "right choice" like everyone thinks
taterhill Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 It was another "Damned If you Do, Damned if you Don't" choices. They let them attempt a 50+ yard feild goal, after the kicker already was short on another 50+ yard FG earlier, or you accept the penalty and hope that your defence can stop them from converting, something they couldn't do on the last 3rd and long the Titans had.. There was no "right choice" like everyone thinks it was a 60 yarder.....
jad1 Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 it was a 60 yarder..... Which is much different than a 51 yarder, especially when you look at Bironas' success from 50-55 yards. It's a no brainer, you take the penalty.
Recommended Posts