IBTG81 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 if you cannot realize that we saved that timeout to get lindell and crew out on the field, then you are simple retarded. Really. Again, not using that TO was the only smart move by the Bills today. Down by two, very little time, needing a FG, you SAVE the TO in case you get close. You dont HOPE that you can get to the line after a big gain and spike the ball. Seriously, what the !@#$ are you talking about. THE TO WAS SAVED IN CASE WE NEEDED TO GET THE FG UNIT OUT THERE. 64417[/snapback] Exactly.
MDH Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 3rd grade math? What the hell are you talking about? Like I said, they were saving the timeout in case they got in field goal range. Obviously, Mularkey thought so too. I'll go with him over you. 64411[/snapback] Mularkey made a mistake, plain and simple (or do you think he is infallible?) Wasting 25 seconds of clock time to save a TO is ridiculous. Nicely done with “the coach knows more than you” argument. Another classic. You’re pulling out all the message board clichés tonight!
Mile High Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 We get the ball with 56 seconds left and a timeout on our own 35. Only 40 yards to go to get into FG range. Drew takes an awful sack. THEN THEY DON'T CALL TIMEOUT! By the time the next play is over there are what, 15 seconds left??? All the throws are in the middle of the field, not a sideline in sight. Bad. 64136[/snapback] bledsoe should have called the to as SOON as the sack was taken.... thats his fault.... period. vertern my ass.. i'm soooo sick of this sh!!t ! every fuggin week.............
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted October 11, 2004 Author Posted October 11, 2004 so stojan & Ed don't agree with me. I rest my case.
IBTG81 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 so stojan & Ed don't agree with me. I rest my case. 64498[/snapback] And Mularkey, the Bills coaching staff, and the announcers...
stevestojan Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Mularkey made a mistake, plain and simple (or do you think he is infallible?) Wasting 25 seconds of clock time to save a TO is ridiculous. Nicely done with “the coach knows more than you” argument. Another classic. You’re pulling out all the message board clichés tonight! 64439[/snapback] WE SAVED THE TIMEOUT TO GIVE THE KICKING TEAM TIME TO GET ON THE FIELD.
4everBills Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 No we used it. But we hads like 1:45 left and just let the clock run? Why? That was the place for the timeo out. It would have meant one more play. Mularkey equals GW!
stevestojan Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 so stojan & Ed don't agree with me. I rest my case. 64498[/snapback] good one. I guess YOU know more than the entire coaching staff and the team that was on the field? No reason to insult me, as i am EXPLAINING why it happened. If he had gotten sacked and called a TO right away, what happens if you want or NEED two plays to get in FG range? Ok, now your in field goal range, but OOPS, too bad, clock is running, and you cant set up for a FG...
IBTG81 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 good one. I guess YOU know more than the entire coaching staff and the team that was on the field? No reason to insult me, as i am EXPLAINING why it happened. If he had gotten sacked and called a TO right away, what happens if you want or NEED two plays to get in FG range? Ok, now your in field goal range, but OOPS, too bad, clock is running, and you cant set up for a FG... 65805[/snapback] My thinking as well. Might not have enough tim to spike the ball, or it could be 4th down.
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted October 11, 2004 Author Posted October 11, 2004 good one. I guess YOU know more than the entire coaching staff and the team that was on the field? No reason to insult me, as i am EXPLAINING why it happened. If he had gotten sacked and called a TO right away, what happens if you want or NEED two plays to get in FG range? Ok, now your in field goal range, but OOPS, too bad, clock is running, and you cant set up for a FG... 65805[/snapback] Just like I (and everyone else) knew last year that using Sam Gash as a decoy WR was amongst the stupidest schemes ever devised... But that coaching staff seemed to think it was brilliant. Look, there's lots of ways to stop the clock but there ain't no way to recover 25 seconds once you've wasted it. You need to stop the clock before you try a FG, TRY THROWING TO SOMEONE NEAR A SIDELINE! Answer this: Down 2 points, which situation would you rather be in? a) 50 seconds left. 2nd and 12 at your own 33 with no timeouts. 2) 25 seconds left. 2nd and 12 at your own 33 with 1 timeout. I'll vote 'a' every time. As for insulting, look back at your first post in this thread. I believe the word you used was "retarded".
Fan in San Diego Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Congrats on passing me to be the most prolific poster on TSW! It's about friggin time someone did that. 64153[/snapback] Ummm, you can spike the ball or throw out of bounds to stop the clock. The TO should have been called after the sack.
IDBillzFan Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Just like I (and everyone else) knew last year that using Sam Gash as a decoy WR was amongst the stupidest schemes ever devised... But that coaching staff seemed to think it was brilliant. Look, there's lots of ways to stop the clock but there ain't no way to recover 25 seconds once you've wasted it. You need to stop the clock before you try a FG, TRY THROWING TO SOMEONE NEAR A SIDELINE! Answer this: Down 2 points, which situation would you rather be in? a) 50 seconds left. 2nd and 12 at your own 33 with no timeouts. 2) 25 seconds left. 2nd and 12 at your own 33 with 1 timeout. I'll vote 'a' every time. As for insulting, look back at your first post in this thread. I believe the word you used was "retarded". 65825[/snapback] Man, that's just retarded. I agree. I appreciate the idea of saving time for the field goal, but the reality is, coming off a sack like that...regrouping and planning your next few plays would have been a good idea.
IBTG81 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Man, that's just retarded. I agree. I appreciate the idea of saving time for the field goal, but the reality is, coming off a sack like that...regrouping and planning your next few plays would have been a good idea. 65837[/snapback] You do know, LA, that if the Bills used their TO there, something would have happened where we needed it at the end. I just know it!
stevestojan Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Just like I (and everyone else) knew last year that using Sam Gash as a decoy WR was amongst the stupidest schemes ever devised... But that coaching staff seemed to think it was brilliant. Look, there's lots of ways to stop the clock but there ain't no way to recover 25 seconds once you've wasted it. You need to stop the clock before you try a FG, TRY THROWING TO SOMEONE NEAR A SIDELINE! Answer this: Down 2 points, which situation would you rather be in? a) 50 seconds left. 2nd and 12 at your own 33 with no timeouts. 2) 25 seconds left. 2nd and 12 at your own 33 with 1 timeout. I'll vote 'a' every time. As for insulting, look back at your first post in this thread. I believe the word you used was "retarded". 65825[/snapback] Jay, sorry about using the word retarded. My bad. As for your question. With this team? You bet your ASS i would go with the Second option EVERY time. 50 seconds with no TO? So, we need a good length pass, the guy get out of bounds (somehow) then a pass in the middle, etc, and a spike. All in 50 seconds. Now what happens if you dont get out of bounds on that first pass? Now, the clock is running, you spike the ball. Now you have no option but to go for the endzone because if you make another pass, you have to get everyone (including Drew) up to the line to spike it. That's three plays, run perfectly, in 55 seconds. If one misses, you are !@#$ed. Or, you have 25 seconds. That gives you two chances to heave the ball ANYWHERE on the field you want, so long as it goes past the 32 yard line to give Lindell even a shot. Give me 25 seconds and a precious TO over a minute and none.
IDBillzFan Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 You do know, LA, that if the Bills used their TO there, something would have happened where we needed it at the end. I just know it! 65849[/snapback] I would have liked that option, Ed. As it turned out, we didn't need it except for a Hail Mary that didn't have a prayer of making the endzone. What I'm saying is...we did things your way, and look what happened.
stevestojan Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 You do know, LA, that if the Bills used their TO there, something would have happened where we needed it at the end. I just know it! 65849[/snapback] I think that's my problem too. Sorry Jay, I think i am just so !@#$ing frustrated i was thinking, "well, if we call it, we we most certainly NEED it later" I dont know... ahhhh ... !@#$.. !@#$!!!! gobills.
IBTG81 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 I would have liked that option, Ed. As it turned out, we didn't need it except for a Hail Mary that didn't have a prayer of making the endzone. What I'm saying is...we did things your way, and look what happened. 65854[/snapback] We're ALL missing the point here. We could have had 10 minutes and three time outs, and we still wouldn't have scored.
Recommended Posts