Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I was miffed at the fact that they threw four straight times to the endzone. Why didn't they use the run, which was working or shorter patterns? Does anyone else see the irony witht he Hackett play calling? The Bills are finally able to run the ball effectively and they decide to throw twice on second and two from the three yard line earlier in the game. It's like Hackett doesn't have a feel for the game

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Fourth and 10 at the KC 15, we're down 4 points, 2:32 left in the game, Buffalo has all of its timeouts remaining.

 

Go for it? Are you kidding? If you take the FG and get a stop, you only need to get to the 35 or so for a chance at a game-winning FG with the wind at your back.

 

I haven't seen anything on this in the news coverage, but that may have been the worst game management decision since we punted from the 32 against the Patriots a few years back.

 

Agree 100%...

 

I just can't figure Marrone out...Maybe it's just me...But it's like he's conservative when he should be aggressive, and aggressive when he should be conservative...It's not 4th and 1...Or even 4th and 5...Your Defense has been playing well most of the game, you have one of the best kickers in the league, your at home, and you still have all your TO's plus the 2 minute warning...To me, the FG there was a no-brainer...But I understand how, in this day and age, folks want to err on the side of being aggressive...I get that...But in that situation I kick the FG and put it on my Defense to get me the ball back one more time knowing that with Carpenter, if I get the ball to the Chiefs 30 or so, it's all but automatic... B-)

Posted

I was surprised. I cant hang them on that call.

 

 

What gets me though, is why they didn't decide it was "4 down territory" and concentrate on getting the 10 yards instead of 4 straight shots at the end zone.

Posted

I was surprised. I cant hang them on that call.

 

 

What gets me though, is why they didn't decide it was "4 down territory" and concentrate on getting the 10 yards instead of 4 straight shots at the end zone.

We couldn't stop them anyway. So we lose by one. Did you have money on the game and needed to cover?

Posted

I had no problem with the concept of using 4 downs to try to score a touch down, I just didn't like the play calling. It seemed like they could have run the ball once or twice or thrown the ball underneath. The Bills looked like a much better team than KC, this loss was a shame.

Posted (edited)

We couldn't stop them anyway. So we lose by one. Did you have money on the game and needed to cover?

 

I dont understand your question or issue with what I said.

 

Im saying, if they had it predetermined that they would go for it (which I hope they did if they went for it on 4th and 10), why take 4 shots at the end zone? Why not try to get the 10 yards in 4 downs which is much easier to get, then have 4 shots inside the 5. Not to mention burn off clock for KC's answer.

 

 

In a vacuum, I cant hate the call to go for it there.

Edited by May Day 10
Posted

Play to win.. I read that all the time on this board. So the coach makes the call to win the game and everyone says he shold have been more conservative. You can't have it both ways

Posted

Play to win.. I read that all the time on this board. So the coach makes the call to win the game and everyone says he shold have been more conservative. You can't have it both ways

 

This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

Had Orton made one of the four passes and scored a TD people here would not only be talking playoffs but also talking Super Bowl! Yup!!

Posted

We have one of the wimpiest 4th down coaches in a league full of wimpy 4th down coaches, which was proven over and over again yesterday. Zero threads on the wimpy punts/FG's. Threads on the one time they went for it though. If I didn't know fans better it'd be unbelievable.

Posted

Fourth and 10 at the KC 15, we're down 4 points, 2:32 left in the game, Buffalo has all of its timeouts remaining.

 

Go for it? Are you kidding? If you take the FG and get a stop, you only need to get to the 35 or so for a chance at a game-winning FG with the wind at your back.

 

I haven't seen anything on this in the news coverage, but that may have been the worst game management decision since we punted from the 32 against the Patriots a few years back.

A TD gives you the lead, a FG means you have to score again after holding KC w/o a score.

 

it was the right call. the QB was off target.

Posted

We have one of the wimpiest 4th down coaches in a league full of wimpy 4th down coaches, which was proven over and over again yesterday. Zero threads on the wimpy punts/FG's. Threads on the one time they went for it though. If I didn't know fans better it'd be unbelievable.

:worthy:

Posted

Go for TD no question. We saw what happened when bills got ball back after KC punt. No time except for silly razzle dazzle play.

 

Completely agree, cant believe anyone thought kicking the FG was the right call there

 

the mistake was going for the TD on all 4 plays, why not run and continue to move the ball...they acted like there was 20 seconds left in the game

Posted (edited)

A TD gives you the lead, a FG means you have to score again after holding KC w/o a score.

 

it was the right call. the QB was off target.

I see your logic, but I disagree. You kick the FG and play to your teams strength, Defense. The D and ST got the Bills to the 25 in the first place. The O is at best average, did not do much the entire game except the first series, and Orton was having a bad game. Bad decision IMO, and going for the TD all 4 plays was flat out stupid.

Edited by CodeMonkey
Posted

Completely agree, cant believe anyone thought kicking the FG was the right call there

 

the mistake was going for the TD on all 4 plays, why not run and continue to move the ball...they acted like there was 20 seconds left in the game

Seems to me if you're trying to save the clock it's to get the ball back and try to score. So if you're trying that, you should kick the field goal, right? By saving all that time, they were giving KC more time to score if we put it in for a touch. For example, if we would have hit that 3rd down throw, kc would have had a lot of time on the clock to score a touchdown.

 

The sequence baffles me, I don't understand it.

 

I agree with the underneath stuff, would love to have seen the ball in boobies hands on a little flare pattern. Just try and stop him with a head of steam. Something it seems the Pats* do with regularity, not putting themselves in long down and distance.

Posted

If they kicked a field goal there, I would have walked out of the stadium. No way you don't go for the win when this team has sucked for more than a decade. 10 yards vs banking on a 3 and out, marching back down to field goal range and kicking it?! Which one of those two scenarios sounds more difficult?

Posted

I was surprised. I cant hang them on that call.

 

 

What gets me though, is why they didn't decide it was "4 down territory" and concentrate on getting the 10 yards instead of 4 straight shots at the end zone.

 

This exactly what I was thinking. If you are going on 4th no matter what, which was the case since they did, why not pickup a few yards on 1-3rd down???? Mind numbing trying to figure these JV coaches out. In over their heads.

Posted (edited)

If they knew they were in 4 down territory they should have ran it a couple times to create a 4th and short. We were running all over them our past 2 drives. Terrible play calling to throw to the endzone 4 times in a row on the #1 ranked pass defense in the league with Orton as your QB.

 

ESPECIALLY since it wasn't goal-to-go and we could have gotten a first down before the endzone.

Edited by TheBillsWillRiseAgain
×
×
  • Create New...