Monday, November 16, 2009

Well of course I have to comment on fourth and 2

Bill Belichick is a great coach, but he is not infallible. I understand his thinking: the Pats have been great, he was figuring they make it and put the game away against a dangerous foe. But even before the snap I was saying it was crazy to go for it. Honestly I thought they were trying to get Indy to jump.

I'm not sure if Kevin Faulk made the first, but I am sure that if the Pats had egregiously squandered two timeouts that drive and challenged it that none of the TV angles would have been "irrefutable" enough to overturn it. This is way I hate replay.

You can't legitimately claim that the odds favor making a fourth and two rather than your defense being able to stop a team from driving 70 yards. The Pats defense is not THAT bad. If the Pats had punted I would have said the defense let them down. As an aside I want to point that everyone is also shredding the Pats D and saying Belichick could not rely on them. Well whose fault is that? Who has been constantly trading down rather than drafting studs, picking up bargain free agents, and letting talent leave? Belichick was too confident he could coach up any stiff and suddenly his defense is old and can't cut it.

The Jags having Maurice Jones-Drew kneel down was dumb too. It is one thing to if you are tied (or ahead), but to assume you will make the fieldgoal is poor risk-reward ratio. What if they had Tony Romoed the field goal snap? Del Rio would have been shredded and rightfully so. Again I understand, but it is the wrong move. And it is not as though Sanchez was lighting them up (16 for 30 with 2 picks).

I don't know why everyone is trying to reinvent the wheel. What happened to playing good defense?

Fun stat of the week: The Kansas City Chiefs have won just 5 of their last 34 games. Three of those five victories came IN Oakland

Also the Browns suck


Post a Comment

<< Home