Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Okay, so I am not going to claim this cost us the game or anything, but as it turns out if we had all three TOs at the end we would have had about 40 seconds more to watch the futility of that last drive.

 

But we did not, because we took our first TO in the second half when it was third and 30 and the play clock was running down.

 

Really, what the heck is the difference between 3rd and 30 and 3rd and 35 at that point?? We're only trying to run a short pass and pick up a few yards to punt.

 

Isn't it obvious the TO is more important there, even if you don't know yet how the game is going to end?

Posted

Okay, so I am not going to claim this cost us the game or anything, but as it turns out if we had all three TOs at the end we would have had about 40 seconds more to watch the futility of that last drive.

 

But we did not, because we took our first TO in the second half when it was third and 30 and the play clock was running down.

 

Really, what the heck is the difference between 3rd and 30 and 3rd and 35 at that point?? We're only trying to run a short pass and pick up a few yards to punt.

 

Isn't it obvious the TO is more important there, even if you don't know yet how the game is going to end?

 

I too was yelling at my TV when they took that timeout. Really silly; there is no difference between 3rd and 30 and 3rd and 35.

Posted

Okay, so I am not going to claim this cost us the game or anything, but as it turns out if we had all three TOs at the end we would have had about 40 seconds more to watch the futility of that last drive.

 

But we did not, because we took our first TO in the second half when it was third and 30 and the play clock was running down.

 

Really, what the heck is the difference between 3rd and 30 and 3rd and 35 at that point?? We're only trying to run a short pass and pick up a few yards to punt.

 

Isn't it obvious the TO is more important there, even if you don't know yet how the game is going to end?

 

the strategic error was starting Trent Edwards at QB and thinking it was going to be any different than last year...

Posted

the strategic error was starting Trent Edwards at QB and thinking it was going to be any different than last year...

 

I tend to agree. But they must not have liked any of the available class last year. THIS year, we should get a good one, at last, I hope, maybe . . .

Posted

I tend to agree. But they must not have liked any of the available class last year. THIS year, we should get a good one, at last, I hope, maybe . . .

 

I don't begrudge them for not taking a QB...I mean McCoy almost got cut in Cleveland for Christ's sake, and he was touted as a can't miss by a lot of people "in the know" here. Spiller will be a dynamic playmaker, regardless of his performance today, so when they ahve a real QB, watch out...

 

Too bad we will have to wait until 2012 to find out since the likelihood of a lockout next year is almost a certainty...

×
×
  • Create New...