November 16th, 2009 at 11:21 AM ^
win every single tournament he plays in? That i one of the dumbest questions I have ever seen around here.
I know people get shocked when favorites lose but one play, that takes a special kind of crazy to ask why they couldn't guarantee that they would get it.
November 16th, 2009 at 11:11 AM ^
that we (the Pats i.e) have well against for the most part. I wouldn't call him an idiot but would take Bill over him any day of the week. Also if you saw his quote he also talked about probabilites...given the fact that Bill knows more about the Pats defense than Dungy, I am going to hazard a guess that Dungy's assessment of said probabilities may not have been accurate.
November 16th, 2009 at 9:41 AM ^
I also liked the call. I know the conventional wisdom is to punt, but agree Colts were in a zone. Plus, I like the attitude- we are playing to win this game- not playing to not lose it. That was the exact opposite of Lloydball right there. If Faulk is one yard further the move was genius.
November 16th, 2009 at 10:25 AM ^
here and Bill is crucified. "conventional" wisdom can go screw itself, it does not win you three rings in a decade, it gives you ....Andy Reid.
November 16th, 2009 at 10:32 AM ^
because what is the cut-off? Do you not decide "we are playing to win this game" when it is 4th and 4, 4th and 8, 4th and 20?
It's a bad call by a great coach. Putting Peyton back another ~40 yards on the punt makes the most sense, especially when it is 4 down territory for the Colts.
Conservative coaching isn't always bad or good for that matter. During that situation, he should punt, unless he had that play up his sleeve all game and was saving it for just this type of situation (meaning he was setting this up on previous 3rd and shorts).
November 16th, 2009 at 11:36 AM ^
"Channeling you're inner Front Butt"...So far, it hasn't worked out too well for anyone. I think it was a pretty stupid move, but hey, when you gamble- sometimes you win and sometimes you don't.
November 16th, 2009 at 2:26 PM ^
It's the "wrong" decision according to everyone because it's unpopular. If he punts and the Colts score anyway (highly likely at home, with that offense, against the defense), then the defense gets blamed for losing the game. Most coaches like to deflect that criticism by playing conservative. Belichick is a great coach because he plays the better odds of going for 4th and 2, and most of the time it works out. This time it didn't, but those are the odds he played. I think the probabilities play out in favor of going for it.
The one coaching question I have is trying to stop Indy once they got inside the 5. I would have let them score, then tried to win with a FG. I think there were still about 30-40 seconds left, and anything can happen with Moss, Welker, and Brady.