- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Playing to win and not to lose
Posted on 2/7/17 at 9:38 am
Posted on 2/7/17 at 9:38 am
Keep hearing this phrase and look back when Atlanta was in field goal range. Feel like those calls were aggressive and should be counted in the playing to win category You are in field goal range. You have one of the best if not the best receiver on the planet. Why settle for a field goal? You are playing to win, try for the touchdown and if you don't get it, then kick the field goal.
Just do NOT take a sack
Just do NOT take a sack
5
Posted on 2/7/17 at 9:41 am to Ron Cheramie
A fg is as good as a TD there. There's playing to win, and there's being reckless.
Posted on 2/7/17 at 9:42 am to Ron Cheramie
quote:
Why settle for a field goal?
Because it puts you up 11 with under 4 minutes left. Because it eliminates the chance of what happened happening.
Posted on 2/7/17 at 9:42 am to Ron Cheramie
Because playing to win meant running the ball and kicking the field goal to go up two possessions
Posted on 2/7/17 at 9:42 am to Ron Cheramie
I don't blame them for trying to win the game. I was commenting in the game thread that the surefire way for them to lose is to go into a shell. They were in the position to kick the FG because they remained aggressive.
But you're right, the coach needs to impress upon Ryan that he has to throw the ball away if the play isn't there. Can't take a sack and lose ground.
But you're right, the coach needs to impress upon Ryan that he has to throw the ball away if the play isn't there. Can't take a sack and lose ground.
Posted on 2/7/17 at 9:44 am to Goldrush25
Or maybe not call such a deep drop when you're in easy field goal range with one of the best kickers in the NFL.
They had clock management issues the entire 2nd half, including snapping the ball with 19 seconds left on the playclock in the 4th
They had clock management issues the entire 2nd half, including snapping the ball with 19 seconds left on the playclock in the 4th
Posted on 2/7/17 at 9:57 am to LNCHBOX
What if the running back fumbled?
I am sure Matt Ryan knew to only throw the ball if receiver is wide open, if not, throw the away. Then you are still in field goal range. Literally, the worst hong hat could have happened, happened
I am sure Matt Ryan knew to only throw the ball if receiver is wide open, if not, throw the away. Then you are still in field goal range. Literally, the worst hong hat could have happened, happened
Posted on 2/7/17 at 9:58 am to Mstate
They were up 25 in the first half and couldn't stop Brady the second half
I would much rather be up 15 or 16 than 11 with Tom Brady getting the ball back
I would much rather be up 15 or 16 than 11 with Tom Brady getting the ball back
Posted on 2/7/17 at 9:59 am to Ron Cheramie
quote:
What if the running back fumbled?
I am sure Matt Ryan knew to only throw the ball if receiver is wide open, if not, throw the away. Then you are still in field goal range. Literally, the worst hong hat could have happened, happened
What happens when you throw an incomplete pass?
And no, that was not the worst thing that could have happened. It could have been a sack fumble like we already saw. It could have been picked off.
You can't honestly say that throwing is safer
Posted on 2/7/17 at 10:01 am to Ron Cheramie
quote:
What if the running back fumbled?
What if the stadium exploded?
quote:
I am sure Matt Ryan knew to only throw the ball if receiver is wide open, if not, throw the away. Then you are still in field goal range. Literally, the worst hong hat could have happened, happened
That was a much more likely outcome than the RB fumbling.
Posted on 2/7/17 at 10:01 am to Ron Cheramie
quote:A sack/INT is much more likely than a fumble.
What if the running back fumbled?
Posted on 2/7/17 at 10:08 am to Ron Cheramie
They could've scored a td running the ball imo. They were gaining good yards on the ground vs the pats front. Plus they would've also been burning clock
Posted on 2/7/17 at 10:09 am to Mstate
people often forget that the other team is playing to win also.
Posted on 2/7/17 at 10:15 am to Goldrush25
quote:
the coach needs to impress upon Ryan that he has to throw the ball away if the play isn't there.
nah. hand the ball off.
PS. If you were the QB, would I have had to REMIND you not to take a sack in that situation?
Posted on 2/7/17 at 10:22 am to Ron Cheramie
quote:
I am sure Matt Ryan knew to only throw the ball if receiver is wide open, if not, throw the away.
I am sure Ryan know not to take a sack and throw the ball away too except he didn't.
Posted on 2/7/17 at 10:25 am to Ron Cheramie
quote:
I would much rather be up 15 or 16 than 11 with Tom Brady getting the ball back
Well the options realistically should have been be up 8 or be up 11. The coaches should have said "we are going to run the ball 3 straight times to set up a 38 yard field goal to go up 2 possessions with 3:30 left, and the Pats may only have 1 time out left.
That is basically game over, and the headline today is "patriots comeback falls short"
Posted on 2/7/17 at 10:27 am to Ron Cheramie
Falcons had 1st and 10 from the Pats 22 with 4:40 left. The goal should be to use clock, force NE to burn TOs and go up 2 scores. They ended up failing on all 3 points (Only burned 1:02 of gametime, 1 Pats TO and not get even a FG attempt)
If they ran on 2nd and 3rd down they could have fumbled but it wasn't likely (Freeman only had one in 227 attempts).
On the other hand, even if they lost yards on 2nd and 3rd down, they would have burned an additional 45 seconds of gametime or forced another NE TO and had an option of around a 42 yard FG.
Bryant has hit 9 for 9 on FGs between 40-49 yards and 6 of 8 for 50+ and the Falcon's special teams hasn't had a FG blocked all year.
That is playing SMART and to win.
If they ran on 2nd and 3rd down they could have fumbled but it wasn't likely (Freeman only had one in 227 attempts).
On the other hand, even if they lost yards on 2nd and 3rd down, they would have burned an additional 45 seconds of gametime or forced another NE TO and had an option of around a 42 yard FG.
Bryant has hit 9 for 9 on FGs between 40-49 yards and 6 of 8 for 50+ and the Falcon's special teams hasn't had a FG blocked all year.
That is playing SMART and to win.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News