CodeMonkey Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 Hmmm it seems there is still some joy in football for me this season .... Bill Belichick went for it Sunday night. His fourth-down decision cost the Pats in Indy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 Yes it could have - if the Bills had won. Not if losing gets us that much closer to a real HC and GM. Now, on to my take on Belichick's call. It was arrogant to the max. Odds of making a 4th and 2 are probably 50% or so; maybe a bit higher. So it doesn't look like a horrible decision on its face. But how much greater are the odds of the Colts scoring a TD when they start at the NE 30 as opposed to their own 30? With one timeout and less than 2:00 on the clock? Pure arrogance. And I agree with a previous poster -- on 3rd and 2, if Belichick knew he was going for it, why not run the ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 Not if losing gets us that much closer to a real HC and GM. Now, on to my take on Belichick's call. It was arrogant to the max. Odds of making a 4th and 2 are probably 50% or so; maybe a bit higher. So it doesn't look like a horrible decision on its face. But how much greater are the odds of the Colts scoring a TD when they start at the NE 30 as opposed to their own 30? With one timeout and less than 2:00 on the clock? Well at least you have the right formula. Not sure how you get that right and come to the wrong conclusion though. Colts TD % from Indy 30 vs. (Colts stop on 4th&2 %) * (% Colts TD from NE 30) The discrepancy in how much more often they score from NE's 30 than their own 30 has to be a lot wider than you think for punting to be correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
judman Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 Worth staying up for just to see slack-jawed Cheatriots! I have never rooted so hard for the Colts. F the Patriots!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsfaninFl Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 HAHA what the !@#$ is Belicheat doing? Belicheat's arrogant and disasterous decision was the highlight of my weekend. Just when I thought I would be depressed all Monday, the sun came out from behind the clouds (which is hard to do that late in the evening) the birds were singing and the pain from the Bills loss was gone. For a moment, I wondered if this was real or if I had fallen asleep on the couch. But the remote fell on the floor, so I knew it had really happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indy Dave Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 While I was stunned by the decision, after sleeping on it, I think Belichick thought his options were: 1. Go for it on fourth down, convert it and win the game. 2. Go for it on fourth down, miss it, and watch the Colts go 28 yards to win the game. 3. Punt and watch the Colts go 70 yards and win the game. In his mind, the only chance they had at winning was to make that fourth down. After thinking about it, I think I agree with him. If the Colts got the ball back, regardless of where the drive started, they were going to score the game-winning TD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiew Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 He is a total A$$. His lack of sportsmanship and class at the coaches handshake always disgusts me - and this time was no different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 Has anyone noticed that the Pats* have stopped getting those big wins since Spygate? I'm not suggesting that the NFL has Bellicheat and his team on double-secret probabtion and now that they can't video the other teams signals, tape their practices and pump their players full of HGH. Not suggesting that at all. I'm just sayin'... PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heels20X6 Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 While I was stunned by the decision, after sleeping on it, I think Belichick thought his options were: 1. Go for it on fourth down, convert it and win the game. 2. Go for it on fourth down, miss it, and watch the Colts go 28 yards to win the game. 3. Punt and watch the Colts go 70 yards and win the game. In his mind, the only chance they had at winning was to make that fourth down. After thinking about it, I think I agree with him. If the Colts got the ball back, regardless of where the drive started, they were going to score the game-winning TD. Like Harrison said, Belichek basically sent a message to his defense that he didn't trust them to win the game. I hope this begins a slow and steady decent into mediocrity for the Patriots and team turmoil. Couldn't happen to a classier coach...and by classy I mean a total piece of sh**. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 How big a deal are those 30-40 yards anyways? Manning picked up 30 yards on a compressed field in under a minute. How much quicker do you think he'd have done it with more room to work with the Pats keeping at least two safeties safeties high? My guess is that the Colts end up right back at the New England 30 with a minute or more left on the clock.An opportunity to win the game with one of the most efficient, experienced, well-coached offenses of the last decade having to merely gain two yards is a very valuable opportunity. Was that 30-40 yards so valuable that it was worth giving up that opportunity? I don't think so, but either way it was certainly a much closer decision than you're giving it credit for. Please stop confusing the issue with facts and logic. It's much more fun to just taunt Belichick for being an "idiot." What does he know about football, anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 Like Harrison said, Belichek basically sent a message to his defense that he didn't trust them to win the game. You could just as easily argue that Belichick's call showed great confidence that his defense could get a stop with the Colts taking over from the Pats' 30. Do you really think Belichick "lost" his players over such a call? There's absolutely no reason to think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heels20X6 Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 You could just as easily argue that Belichick's call showed great confidence that his defense could get a stop with the Colts taking over from the Pats' 30. Do you really think Belichick "lost" his players over such a call? There's absolutely no reason to think so. I'm not sure, but why would Rodney Harrison, a long time player for Bill, make a statement like that if there wasn't truth in it? He's from that locker room...he's played with some of those guys. If anyone would know how the defense is feeling, it would be him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 I'm not sure, but why would Rodney Harrison, a long time player for Bill, make a statement like that if there wasn't truth in it? He's from that locker room...he's played with some of those guys. If anyone would know how the defense is feeling, it would be him. You make a fair point, but I don't think Harrison is necessarily correct. (Bruschi said the same thing as Harrison, I understand.) I think many former players (even ones who played for Belichick) suffer from the same overly conservative, career football coach mindset that infests the NFL. Belichick was not insulting his defense; he was playing the percentages and doing what he thought gave his team the best chance to win. His philosophy has been proven correct time and time again. It didn't work one time--so what? There's every chance that if they had punted the Colts would have gone 60 yards for the score, so it's impossible to say that his decision lost the game. It's worth noting that Belichick also made a somewhat controversial move when he kicked off to the Bills with just over two minutes left, trailing by 5, rather than trying an onside kick. That was actually showing confidence in his defense, wasn't it? My point is, with Belichick, there's no disrespect intended; he's just trying to win and he does that by playing the percentages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 You make a fair point, but I don't think Harrison is necessarily correct. (Bruschi said the same thing as Harrison, I understand.) I think many former players (even ones who played for Belichick) suffer from the same overly conservative, career football coach mindset that infests the NFL. Belichick was not insulting his defense; he was playing the percentages and doing what he thought gave his team the best chance to win. His philosophy has been proven correct time and time again. It didn't work one time--so what? There's every chance that if they had punted the Colts would have gone 60 yards for the score, so it's impossible to say that his decision lost the game. It's worth noting that Belichick also made a somewhat controversial move when he kicked off to the Bills with just over two minutes left, trailing by 5, rather than trying an onside kick. That was actually showing confidence in his defense, wasn't it? My point is, with Belichick, there's no disrespect intended; he's just trying to win and he does that by playing the percentages. It doesn't matter what Belichick did his haters would be out to get him regardless. If he punted then the same haters would be saying that he disrespected his QB by not trusting this future HOF is good enough to get a lousy 2 yards to seal the deal. Bottom line is Belichick looked to seal the deal by handing the ball to his HOF QB who was on fire in the game. Can't argue with such logic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 It doesn't matter what Belichick did his haters would be out to get him regardless.If he punted then the same haters would be saying that he disrespected his QB by not trusting this future HOF is good enough to get a lousy 2 yards to seal the deal. Bottom line is Belichick looked to seal the deal by handing the ball to his HOF QB who was on fire in the game. Can't argue with such logic! Strongly disagree. Nobody ripped him for punting in the AFC title game in Indy a couple years ago. It's not that there's a vendetta against Bellichick. It's just that fans and blowhards like Trent Dilfer are brainwashed and bad at math. And it's cool for "football guys" to not believe in math (just like it was once cool for baseball guys to thumb their noses at Bill James) and so they make up empty statements that mean nothing, like "sending messages". The NE players got over it when Lawyer Milloy - a respected veteran leader was cut - and everyone working at espn said that "BB lost his team". But OMG how are those defensive players going to get out of bed in the morning and respect their coach after they went for a 4th&2!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 I don't blame Belichick for the call. His defense was getting shredded in the 2nd half and he didn't want to watch them lose it. And whether they punted or not, it wouldn't have made a difference. Give Manning 2 minutes from anywhere on the field and with a chance to win, and even better with a spare TO, and it's game over. The Colts stole this game. Like the Patrtiots stole the opening game from the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts