What was up with that San Diego punt on 4th and 10 trailing in the fourth quarter? Trying to cover the spread? Appalling.
« Other Election News | Main | Something Different »
Punts
20 Jan 2008 07:07 pm
Comments (29)
I'm wondering why not one of the announcers mentioned that horrible no-call on the 3rd and 11 for the patriots on that pass to faulk. It was a clear pick play.
I think they said it was a pick during one of the replays. They just failed to mention that that's against the rules.
That's what they get for getting rid of Marty and going with Norv.
marty wouldn't have gone for it either.
agreed. it would be interesting to see the whole economics on this phase of football both over and under the table, and real and potential impact on behavior, both legal and corrupt, taxed and untaxed.
Pats 21, Chargers 12. I take it Hillary won?
They should have at least rushed once on the first three downs.
Rushing on 3rd and 10, understanding that it was Four Down Time/Territory, would have been a swell idea. Norv.
This has been the story of the 2007 season for the Chargers: over-reliance on Philip Rivers and under-reliance on their stellar running game. Norv can't get it into his head: Rivers is NOT an elite quarterback.
Some coaching decisions can only be described as "Norvalicious".
It's worth mentioning (since I'm piling on ol' #17) that 7 points of that 9 point difference is directly related to Rivers' back-footing of that first intercepted pass. Take the sack, idiot!
There were like 10 minutes to go at the time of that punt - plenty of time, they just couldn't stop the run.
Of, pick plays are illegal down field - not on the line of scrimmage.
There were like 10 minutes to go at the time of that punt - plenty of time, they just couldn't stop the run.
There's only enough time if things go exactly right. But assuming you go for it on 4th and don't convert, you still need things to go almost exactly right, so what's the downside? I mean, honestly, we're talking the 36 yard line - in the end, they netted all of 24 yards on that punt.
You knew NE was going to have the ball for a minimum of 2 minutes. Is 24 yards of field position worth 2 minutes? I don't think so. But it gets worse, because it was a *minimum* of 2 minutes; the risk was exchanging 24 yards of field position for much *more* than 2 minutes of game clock - a risk that ultimately materialized.
The Chargers blew it when they did not go for it on 4th and 2 around the end zone earlier on, instead taking their fourth field goal.
It's like the Chargers did not want to win.
interesting that even when the patriots suck they can still beat the other semi-final team in the AFC.
they should be difficult to stop in pheonix.
They still had time there, and if you watched the Chargers consistently you would know that their punter is the best in the league at nailing another team at their own 2 yard line, where lots of weird things happen. He has been a weapon for 2+ years, and if he had hit a coffin corner and they got a safety or turnover out of it we might be calling Norv a genius.
Oh, and that uncalled pick is par for the course if you are a Charger's fan and it is a close game in the fourth quarter. Usually the refs pull out a real marginal holding call (5 yards, automatic first down) on Quentin Jammer on third and twenty as a way to kill any sort of comeback.
I'd like to associate myself with flounder's remarks, except for her whining about the refs. (You can make contact up to five yards from the line)
The chargers did show a ton of heart though, and if they were healthy who knows.
if he had hit a coffin corner and they got a safety or turnover out of it we might be calling Norv a genius.
And if he hadn't, we might be calling you a Loser.
Don't be sore, you had that coming. You wrote:
if he had hit a coffin corner and they got a safety or turnover out of it we might be calling Norv a genius.
Flounder is right: Scifres can be a real weapon. Not on that punt, though.
Giants go for it on 4th and 5 from the 33... and get a lucky penalty for the first.
Why else do you want to pin the other team deep except to pressure them into making bad decisions that result in turnovers/safeties/points? I was basically trying to say that Scifres is a great punter and he has made a lot of big plays (watch his 4th quarter from last week). He had an off week, but you want to the game in the hands of playmakers.
I'd like submit the last play of the first half from last week and the phantom interference in the 2nd half from last week as evidence that the Chargers get no ref love.
flounder, it's a pretty weak argument.
Essentially, you want a miracle: a coffin corner + a safety/turnover. I think making 10 yards on 4th down is a lot less to ask for. (and in the absence of that miracle, the downsides are far greater than handing the ball back to NE at their own 36).
Your argument is premised on avoiding another Pats score. Given the weather, they need to get to at least the 20 (anything short of that in this game/condition, and Belichick goes for it on 4th down) - so from the 36 that's basically 45 yards. But if the Pats can *move* the ball 45 yards, they are going to be able to take the game clock down to virtually nothing in any event (as they ultimately did, but from the 12, not the 36).
Appalling. Truly awful. Boston drew JAX who didn't really try to win. Boston drew Bolts who didn't really try to win.
Now they get NJ Gints instead of the Pack in the Superbowl. It's like an entire playoff run with not serious competition showing up at all. Indy, GB, Titans, Dallas all probably would have ended the 'prefect' season.
Anybody think something's wrong with Brady? He was throwing terribly in the first quarter and I don't think he threw the ball more than 10 yards down the field after that.
Anybody think something's wrong with Brady? He was throwing terribly in the first quarter and I don't think he threw the ball more than 10 yards down the field after that.
The problem with Brady is that he's not actually jesus. If you put some pressure on him, he's prone to the same mistakes of certain other top QBs. I think it's actually worse in this situation b/c he hasn't really faced any real pressure in quite some time - he's out of practice dealing with it.
But what does Bill do? Let a struggling Brady kill their season? No- he runs a reverse to Moss and some tunnel screens. At the end of the day Brady can throw 3 INTs and they still win. I would say that the Chargers offense didn't show up, but they kicked 4 FGs. Turn those into TDs and they win easily. That's mostly on Rivers. Of course, what was he doing in the game at all? Mediocre starting QB is injured, doesn't get many practice snaps- that's when you bring in your backup- one of the best in the league. The problem is Rivers' reputation far exceeds his actual ability. Turner's job may have been on the line if he spurned GM's pet Rivers by benching him in favor of Volek.
mpowell, laying this on Rivers is a bit unfair. LT holds the NFL season record for touchdowns, doesn't he? Gates is at his best around the goal line. They're both hurt, as was Rivers. That's very tough to overcome.
I'm going to go out on a limb and blame this win on the Pats being really good. I know it sounds ridiculous, but I think that the reason they won 17 straight games before this is because they're good, and not a series of fortunate incidents and conspiracies. I mean, maybe in some of the games they won, there was some luck involved, but not all 17. It sounds whacky, I know, but it makes sense if you look at it from a view unobstructed by your own butthole.
Nobody's arguing the Pats aren't good this year. They're arguing that the Chargers could have beat them. Brady has one or two bad games a year -- this certainly could have been one of them.
Actually, I think it's pretty clear that a healthy SD would have beaten NE soundly yesterday. They were missing more than half of their offense. Brady didn't just have a bad game; he had the same sort of game against SD that everyone's been having.
My criticism of Rivers does not come from just one game. And of course he was injured. But that's my point The Pats defense is not that good and he had a lot of opportunities. In the middle of the field he could hit WRs who were pretty wide open, but when the field tightened up at the goal line - no dice. If he was healthier, it might have been different. But that's why Volek should have been in the game.
How ridiculous is it that you would bench the best RB in the game b/c he wasn't at 100%, but you start a mediocre injured QB?
Comments closed February 03, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
They were clearly in 4 down territory. They should have at least rushed once on the first three downs. I'm wondering why not one of the announcers mentioned that horrible no-call on the 3rd and 11 for the patriots on that pass to faulk. It was a clear pick play.
Posted by david | January 20, 2008 7:14 PM