Worst (regular season) coached game in the entire McD era

[RichRiderBills]

51 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

No, this takes the cake

Last week was bad, but we were out coached and outmanned. 

 

This week, the coaching design to pass 3 times out of your endzone instead of making Houston burn a single timeout is outragoeus

 

It does take the cake, but similar tendencies got us in the same problems. Streaks of huck it deep or nothing 3 and outs where all semblance of a coherent script just goes out the window.... especially before the half. 

 

 

[colin]

2 minutes ago, DC Greg said:

Add this to the mix to all the other aforementioned incompetence and coaching failures 

 

 

 

 

ok, this is a vet player pointing out that the coaches have lost the flipping plot, a soft mutiny of sorts.

 

remember the denver loss last season?  pure coaching error.

 

mcd works hard all week and gets his d to play hard, even if his scheme can be awful vs good qbs or power run teams.

 

his game day management is beyond bad.  not pulling klien vs kc, keeping cook on the bench, 13 seconds, denver last year, this game.  he just is not good on game day, and having him w two zero track record young coordinators isn't a good look either.

[LABILLBACKER]

54 minutes ago, RiotAct said:

It was entertaining and exciting. I have no problem with that.   McD was probably resigned to the fact that we would lave lost the coin flip and then given up a heart-wrenching TD to Diggs anyways.

There's absolutely nothing entertaining about watching your teams coaches perform stupidity. 

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

I have the actual time stamps (from the frame rate). They were as I said.

 

But you’re going off the game clock - not the timestamps - which makes sense.
 

Regardless, the point is still the same. Our run plays were taking between 4-6 seconds on average. Which is exactly what our passes took on that drive. 

 

The extra 2-3 seconds they may have received still would not have been enough time, with no timeouts, to get into field goal range.

 

 

I don't think three runs would have taken 12 seconds. The Bills couldn't risk anything lateral because of the safety risk so they had to be hard fast downhill runs. I think generously maybe 3 seconds per play.

[KCNC]

59 minutes ago, Einstein said:

There is NEVER a circumstance where you run an offense, in a tied game, with 30-some seconds left, out of your own endzone!

 

You make them burn their timeouts.

 

Let’s say we get 5 yards on 3 runs… that 59 yard kick is now a 67 yard kick.

 

Why?

 

Without timeouts available, the Texans can’t run that last second play to get another 3-4 yards. So you have the 5 yards from the runs, AND the 3-4 yards they got on the last play. 

 

He isn’t making it from 67.

 

And don’t even get me started on not challenging the Kincaid catch and instead taking TWO timeouts into the half.

 

Stroud gifted us a punt, when they should have been kicking a go-ahead field goal… and we return the favor by throwing 3 times out of our endzone!?!?

 

 

100% on all of these.

[GunnerBill]

7 minutes ago, DC Greg said:

Add this to the mix to all the other aforementioned incompetence and coaching failures 

 

 

 

That is unacceptable.

[RiotAct]

8 minutes ago, DC Greg said:

Add this to the mix to all the other aforementioned incompetence and coaching failures 

 

 

oh no, it’s happening again!!!

[Process]

38 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Well, duh? You don’t make coaching decisions based on no detail or foresight. You make decisions based on the math and probability of what could happen.

 

 

Then you’re as wrong as the coaches. It’s that simple.

 

 

You mean when he got hit as he was throwing it?

With Houston having three timeouts, running three times does not accomplish what you think are thinking it does. 

 

We needed a first down to get the game to OT. 

 

The decision to throw was not wrong. The play calls and throwing deep were the issue. 

Edited October 6 by Process

[Einstein]

1 minute ago, Process said:

With Houston having three timeouts, running three times does not accomplish what you think are thinking it does. 

 

Actually it does.

 

Getting a first down guarantees overtime, but comes with considerable risk if you don’t get the first down.
 

Running gives you the best chance of getting to OT without the risk of throwing to get a first down.

 

1 minute ago, Process said:

The decision to throw was not wrong.

 

Yes it was.

 

1 minute ago, Process said:

 

The play calls and throwing deep were the issue. 

 

Actually throwing deep was the only thing that gave us a fighting chance. The deeper passes is what took an extra second or two off the clock (which is Gunner’s point). Short passes are essentially a run.

 

[Alphadawg7]

49 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Oh please.  Run and TO x 3.  Takes maybe 10 seconds.  We kick, they throw a quick out.  Done.

Wrong.  Even if they pick up just 2 yards on each of the first 2 runs, now it’s 3rd and 6 from the 10 instead of 3rd and ten where you are dropping into your end zone risking losing the game on a sack too or intentional grounding in the end zone that becomes a sack.  
 

Then they just need to convert a short 3rd down potentially with more breathing room.  Or punting the ball further making getting into FG range harder.
 

Passing on the first 2 downs was the dumbest decision I can recall seeing since Atlanta kept passing in the SB and giving NE the opportunity to come back and win.  
 

There is no defending this stupidity 

Edited October 6 by Alphadawg7

[Warriorspikes51]

6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That is unacceptable.

that’s worse than the playcalls and clock at end of game. Depressing

[BufBills83]

Just now, Einstein said:

 

Actually it does.

 

Getting a first down guarantees overtime, but comes with considerable risk if you don’t get the first down.
 

Running gives you the best chance of getting to OT without the risk of throwing to get a first down.

 

 

Yes it was.

 

 

Actually throwing deep was the only thing that gave us a fighting chance. The deeper passes is what took an extra second or two off the clock (which is Gunner’s point). Short passes are essentially a run.

 

 

Running 3 times doesn't guarantee it would have gone to overtime.  They would have used all their timeouts.  Then we punt and they get the ball around the same spot, and probably run 2 out of bounds plays instead of one in bounds.

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

yeah but if they pick up 2 yards on each of the first 2 runs, now it’s 3rd and 6 from the 10 instead of 3rd and ten where you are dripping into your end zone risking losing the game on a sack too or intentional grounding in the end zone that becomes a sack.  
 

Passing on the first 2 downs was the dumbest decision I can recall seeing since Atlanta kept passing in the SB and giving NE the opportunity to come back and win.  

I don’t think the game outcome is different either way.

[Einstein]

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

yeah but if they pick up 2 yards on each of the first 2 runs, now it’s 3rd and 6 from the 10 instead of 3rd and ten where you are dripping into your end zone risking losing the game on a sack too or intentional grounding in the end zone that becomes a sack.  

 

A lot of people are missing this.

Passing brings with it so much risk.

 

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Passing on the first 2 downs was the dumbest decision I can recall seeing since Atlanta kept passing in the SB and giving NE the opportunity to come back and win.  

 

Bingo. 

[oldmanfan]

7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That is unacceptable.

If true absolutely

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, Einstein said:

There is NEVER a circumstance where you run an offense, in a tied game, with 30-some seconds left, out of your own endzone!

 

You make them burn their timeouts.

 

Let’s say we get 5 yards on 3 runs… that 59 yard kick is now a 67 yard kick.

 

Why?

 

Without timeouts available, the Texans can’t run that last second play to get another 3-4 yards. So you have the 5 yards from the runs, AND the 3-4 yards they got on the last play. 

 

He isn’t making it from 67.

 

And don’t even get me started on not challenging the Kincaid catch and instead taking TWO timeouts into the half.

 

Stroud gifted us a punt, when they should have been kicking a go-ahead field goal… and we return the favor by throwing 3 times out of our endzone!?!?

 

 

The die was cast when they hired Brady.  He’s an idiot.

[BufBills83]

Just now, Einstein said:

 

A lot of people are missing this.

Passing brings with it so much risk.

 

 

Bingo. 

 

I don't think you're understanding that the timeouts don't really matter to Houston when they get the ball back in good field position and only need 5 yards or so to get into field goal range.  They can run a couple plays out of bounds and kick.

[Einstein]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

I don’t think the game outcome is different either way.

 

By this logic, any decision that results in a loss, was the right decision.

 

If Josh took the ball and purposefully ran out of the back of the endzone, creating a safety and losing the game, that’s the “right” decision just because the outcome is the same (a loss)? No.

[BufBills83]

1 minute ago, Einstein said:

 

By this logic, any decision that results in a loss, was the right decision.

 

If Josh took the ball and purposefully ran out of the back of the endzone, creating a safety and losing the game, that’s the “right” decision just because the outcome is the same (a loss)? No.

 

No, but passing 3 times or running 3 times and not getting a first down results in the same outcome.

[RiotAct]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

If true absolutely

it’s not, I just watched the replay (ugh), we had 11 out there.