Why running the ball on 3rd and 7 was the right call and why this forum is retarded.

[MplsBronco]

Just rewatched the game. Even Dierdork and the other guy were SHOCKED that Manning handed off on 3rd down. Said the Ravens couldn't have hoped for anything better after giving up a first down already. Called it VERY conservative and proved to be prophetic.

I don't get all this play the percentages crap. Myopic bull****. You have the opportunity to end the game right then and there. You have to take your shot. And Fox has the gall to come out and say no regrets Sorry, but not looking forward to the future with this assclown and Mannings diminishing physical capabilities. Things are not bright, hate to break it to many of you.

[extralife]

so let me get this straight: you are using DAN DEIRDORF to back up your point?

[MplsBronco]

Originally Posted by extralife

so let me get this straight: you are using DAN DEIRDORF to back up your point?

Yeah, I know. Once great player, been around the game forever. Seen more games, situations than your condescending ass. The guy is a dope but he knows a thing or two about the game.

[R8R H8R]

Originally Posted by Al Wilson

Obviously Elway is going to back Fox infront of the media and public you ****ing genius. What is he supposed to do ? Put him on the ****ing spot and create controversy and noise for everyone?

Obviously, and not surprising, my point went right over your head. He also backs him privately because if he didn't, he would have asked Fox prior to the PC to take some responsibility and concede that he may do it differently the next time the situation arises.

Fox said no such thing today! Instead, he said he will play it the same way again in the future 10 times out of 10. That is how I know Elway backs him privately you ****ing genius.

Btw and FWIIW, a guy does not have to agree with the decision to back him up.

[Al Wilson]

Originally Posted by R8R H8R

Obviously, and not surprising, my point went right over your head. He also backs him privately because if he didn't, he would have asked Fox prior to the PC to take some responsibility and concede that he may do it differently the next time the situation arises.

Fox said no such thing today! Instead, he said he will play it the same way again in the future 10 times out of 10. That is how I know Elway backs him privately you ****ing genius.

Btw and FWIIW, a guy does not have to agree with the decision to back him up.

Whatever he says to the media isn't the same behind closed doors.

And if he did not back Fox it doesn't mean that he told him you have to take blame for it infront of the media. Why would he do that??

If you want to believe whatever he or Elway said to the media then that's your choice. But, I hardly believe Elway backed him 100% privately. Elway knows this game, and I'm sure a lot was said closed doors. You, on the other hand, believe whatever Fox or Elway say to the public.

[Bronco Yoda]

Originally Posted by Cito Pelon

I've heard a lot of people say Manning should have shown the balls to override what Fox wanted to do, should have said, "Bull****, we're gonna put them away right now."

You could see that Manning was a little shocked as well. When they were kicking the extra point he was still standing there with his hat on. No helmet, no playbook, no huddling up with the guys. Nope. They were all caught with their pants down.

[extralife]

Originally Posted by MplsBronco

Yeah, I know. Once great player, been around the game forever. Seen more games, situations than your condescending ass. The guy is a dope but he knows a thing or two about the game.

you want to know who else has seen more games than your or my ass? John Fox!

next.

[R8R H8R]

[QUOTE=Al Wilson;3781802]

Whatever he says to the media isn't the same behind closed doors.

True, but I am not arguing that in my post.

And if he did not back Fox it doesn't mean that he told him you have to take blame for it infront of the media. Why would he do that??

I didn't say take the blame, I said take some responsibility. There is a difference, and coaches do it often, including Fox, but he did no such thing today. Instead, he said he would do it again.

If you want to believe whatever he or Elway said to the media then that's your choice. But, I hardly believe Elway backed him 100% privately. Elway knows this game, and I'm sure a lot was said closed doors. You, on the other hand, believe whatever Fox or Elway say to the public

I do, but this is where you are not getting my point: you do not have to agree with someone's decision to back them up 100% to make that decision, now and in the future. Meaning Elway may not agree with Fox's conservative calls sometimes, but he sure as hell isn't going to tell him to do otherwise. Because f he did, Fox wouldn't have said he will do the same again.

[Al Wilson]

Originally Posted by R8R H8R

I do, but this is where you are not getting my point: you do not have to agree with someone's decision to back them up 100% to make that decision, now and in the future. Meaning Elway may not agree with Fox's conservative calls sometimes, but he sure as hell isn't going to tell him to do otherwise. Because f he did, Fox wouldn't have said he will do the same again.

Fair enough. At the end of the day it bit us in the ass, whether you like it or not. Even if Elway does back him as a coach and wishes not to interfere with playcalling and such, I'm sure Peyton will have more say in those situations next time around. Fox should stick to defense and never have a say on offense. His defense got their asses handed to them.

[R8R H8R]

Originally Posted by Al Wilson

Fair enough. At the end of the day it bit us in the ass, whether you like it or not. Even if Elway does back him as a coach and wishes not to interfere with playcalling and such, I'm sure Peyton will have more say in those situations next time around. Fox should stick to defense and never have a say on offense. His defense got their asses handed to them.

Btw, I didn't like the decision to run it at the time, but I guess the difference is, I completely understand it. I also disagree with you that in itself was the very play that bit us in the butt. No, they tied the game because our secondary failed us ( or specifically Moore, if you prefer) in a situation that the Ravens had less than a 5% chance of winning the game.

Honestly, that defensive breakdown is what chars my butt, and probably will throughout the offseason.

[Al Wilson]

Originally Posted by R8R H8R

Btw, I didn't like the decision to run it at the time, but I guess the difference is, I completely understand it. I also disagree with you that in itself was the very play that bit us in the butt. No, they tied the game because our secondary failed us ( or specifically Moore, if you prefer) in a situation that the Ravens had less than a 5% chance of winning the game.

Honestly, that defensive breakdown is what chars my butt, and probably will throughout the offseason.

If our defense was having a great game then running the ball on that down might have been ok at the time, but the defense was getting torched. Bailey failed us more than Moore did. My overall view is that John Fox's conservativness in the game is what bit us in the ass. You have the greatest QB of all time with a chance to kill the game, and yet you don't give him a chance to end it and hand it back to your defense that has been getting owned all game? That didn't make sense to me. Honestly, I wish if Fox had some balls in him like Shanahan ... as gutsy as he was, he would always want to end the game with his offense when he had a chance.

[Hulamau]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

Normally I'd agree, but in this case, what if Manning told you that they called for a pass, but Baltimore was in a dime defense and was playing pass, so he audibled to a run?

Because that is NOT what happened that's Why!!! Foxy admitted today in the post mort that on that series in question his main objective was indeed to drain clock time and not so much to get a first down!!

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...t-to-lose-game

Nothing strange or unpredictable here folks, its Fox ball, conservative to the core at the end of games and sometimes at the end of halves and HIGHLY predictable such that he would run the same series of plays 10 times out of 10 times as he also noted today, regardless of past outcomes the previous nine times!!! I think that quote should define the word 'STUBBORN" in Websters new edition dictionary!

As the beginning of this thread notes, there are some defensible reasons and historical stats supporting such a philosophy. And in many game situations it may well be the right call and has been, but you HAVE to know where you are in a game of this magnitude and how the momentum and time element is either working for you or against going so 'safe' and playing not to lose as Foxy clearly did.

The problem is, those stats are not taking into account context and the moment in the game, the type of game ... freezing cold long game against a seasoned playoff hardened opponent with a strong armed Hail Mary completing QB that you are trying to punt the game back over too with 1:15 left after you fail to both get the first down AND not run out the clock leaving enough time for said LONG BALL Chukker Frozen Joe to heave at least two, maybe three, long bombs! The Ravens will take those odds any day of the week thank you and made it work out fine .. with a little help from Moore ... much to our demise!

If they are incomplete or knocked down he still has time for another try and one of three things will happen, two of them good or at least neutral for the Ravens .. a neutral outcome in one option at least until they get to the last throw where time runs out if they don't make a TD:

Option 1. Joe completes the Alley Ooop Hail Mary past a hapless Broncos Rahim Moore and a confused Tony Carter who let JAcoby streak past while he considered whether he might try to run with him and Moore was drifting back in the general direction of where Jacoby was heading but apparently was dreaming of his Bahamas vacation about to start rather than making a real effort to get a better angle on the ball and come in from at least behind the WR to either jump and knock the ball down or INT is and if all else fails and the Jones catches it at least be there in position for a guarantee tackle to also end the game.

No way the whole team, including all the fatties on the Oline recover from the shock of actually completing that pass and all get down there and lined up properly to snap the ball for a FG attempt in 18 seconds left which is what would have been left at most after the long route was run, pass caught and tackle made!

But NOOOOO! Moore at the critical point of his life to date was totally out to lunch..... this is why Fox, in all his "play it safe statistical odds' bet against PMFManning trying to deliberately get that first down on the last three plays we had the ball before punting to Ravens, for the win and to end it all right there rather than leave it up to either Jacob Hester or Ronnie Hillman trying to run over Haloti Ngata, Suggs and Ray Lewis on 3 successive DIVE PLAYS to save the day .... I know I would bet on Manning any day over Hillman or Hester for a 7 yard dive play between guard and center into the teeth of the Ravens front 7 when they all know it is coming!

...Or, god forbid rely on the porous weaker members of our secondary when a smart Ravens OC sends Boldin and Smith out to the left side of the field to draw Champ and Harris out of action and then toss the called play to the right deep sideline to speedy Jones with only Carter and Moore anywhere near the play at all!

Its very clear the Ravens knew how to take advantage of our very POOR situational awareness error in trying to follow the simple 'Stats rule' described in the first post of this thread, and forget what kind of game you were in and the fact that Manning is one of the best in the NFL history at grabbing a first down when the team really MUST have it!

Option 2. the Pass is incomplete or we knock it down, that works as a neutral outcome on maybe two Hail Mary attempts max for the Ravens leaving then one last Hail Mary attempt to tie the game.. each incomplete stops the clock.

Option 3. Rahim Moore instead of crapping the season away actually makes the play that Champ later swears he makes 99 times out of a 100 in practice and shares Hero status with Manning and DT for winning the game and keeping us alive for another week at least.

Alas, we all know what happened.

Insight-fully Elway said today that as long as everyone on the team takes this pain and the lessons learned from their mistakes and does NOT GET TOO DEFENSIVE and instead really digest what happened and determine to improve and not make the same mistake again, then this game can really serve as the spring board to bigger and better things.

But if they (See Fox in his interview) just brush off the hard questions and not address them head on and acknowledge and learn from the lost opportunities, then we are more likely going to have to experience them again!!

I really hope Foxy and the players got the not so subtle message from The Duke who finally learned them well after the 1996 Jags game and will take it to heart!?

[NUB]

A minute is a heckuva a long time in today's NFL...

You play the percentages or you literally try and end the game. Denver's secondary was getting torched all goddam day long against a QB known for his huge arm and long-ball. You just don't run it there -- you pass to try and end the damn game. Denver wasn't even gonna be competing at that point were it not for two return-TDs! You realize that? Baltimore was controlling the game and Denver was lucky just to have a lead of any sort. You can play the "percentages" all you want, but all signs, including the obvious fact Denver lost, should have said go for it. Nobody should have felt safe just because a bunch stats told you so. We all saw the same damn game. The safest option was for Baltimore to never see the field again. Period.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by Hulamau

Because that is NOT what happened that's Why!!! Foxy admitted today in the post mort that on that series in question his main objective was indeed to drain clock time and not so much to get a first down!!

Way to bump my post from hours before that revelation. Where were you when it was a legit question posed by half the board?

[TonyR]

Originally Posted by MplsBronco

Just rewatched the game. Even Dierdork and the other guy were SHOCKED that Manning handed off on 3rd down. Said the Ravens couldn't have hoped for anything better after giving up a first down already. Called it VERY conservative and proved to be prophetic.

Really? I'll have to go back and watch myself. I thought they questioned the 3rd down hand off to Hester earlier in the game (which I myself, and I think everybody here, question) but thought they agreed with the decision to run the clock in the late 4th quarter which we're talking about here.

[WolfpackGuy]

No team is going to pass in that situation.

Bleeding the clock was the right call.

The Ratbirds were out of time outs, and you don't expect some fuggin fluke play like that to beat you.

[Beantown Bronco]

I love the "it didn't work, so it was the wrong call" arguments.

How about all those 3rd and longs where passing the ball didn't get the first down? I guess it was the wrong call to pass and we should've run instead? Is that really the argument?

Sometimes it doesn't matter what you do. But just because something doesn't work, it doesn't mean it was the wrong call. Receivers drop balls, balls get batted, people fall down, people don't do their job. Any number of things can make the perfect play call not work, just as there are instances of plays being run that should have no chance of succeeding sometimes end up working.

[MplsBronco]

Originally Posted by extralife

you want to know who else has seen more games than your or my ass? John Fox!

next.

Who was right in this case, genius? Certainly NOT John Fox. Next.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

I love the "it didn't work, so it was the wrong call" arguments.

That's kind of a straw man though. Nobody's faulting it because it didn't work. They're faulting it because it wasn't designed to. Ronnie Hillman wasn't going to get 7 yards in the interior of the Ravens D. Even if you absolutely feel compelled to run the ball (and the clock) you could at least make an effort and not completely concede the ball. That whole 3-down set of plays was a concession.

[MplsBronco]

Originally Posted by TonyR

Really? I'll have to go back and watch myself. I thought they questioned the 3rd down hand off to Hester earlier in the game (which I myself, and I think everybody here, question) but thought they agreed with the decision to run the clock in the late 4th quarter which we're talking about here.

Yep, they were fully expecting playaction, remarking at how Manning is one of the best intermediate passers in the game and how he is suredly going to try and conver here. Then shock that he actually handed off and how it was a dream come true for the Ravens. The best thing they could have hoped for.

I believe you are referring to the fist possession in overtime. We had a 2nd and 1. Ran Hillman up the gut on 2nd down. Ran Hester up the gut on 3rd down. Stymied both times. I don't recall them commenting on the playcalling as much as crediting the Ravens for stuffing them. But yes, that was more horrible, weak-tit playcalling. There could be another Hester run on 3rd down earlier in the game but I had forgotten this exchange on the first drive of OT.

[MplsBronco]

Originally Posted by WolfpackGuy

No team is going to pass in that situation.
Bleeding the clock was the right call.

The Ratbirds were out of time outs, and you don't expect some fuggin fluke play like that to beat you.

BS, plain and simple.

[Punisher]

What the **** you talking about? Running the ball on 3 and 7 was absolutely the wrong thing to do. It was a b**** call if we make a 8 yard Catch the game is over. We played not to lose, in the playoffs you play to win.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

That's kind of a straw man though. Nobody's faulting it because it didn't work. They're faulting it because it wasn't designed to.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

[Bronco Yoda]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

Sometimes it doesn't matter what you do. But just because something doesn't work, it doesn't mean it was the wrong call.

I disagree. IMO It ALWAYS matters what you do. The coach needs to make it clear that every play counts. You play 60 min. not 59 min. & 30 seconds! You fight to the end not just almost the end. You give it your ALL not just 97.2% but 100%. Balls to the wall. Pedal to the metal. All hands on deck. Whatever...

To use a baseball analogy here. You can't hit the ball if you don't swing! If you have a full count and the game is on the line or even runners are stranded with two outs...I tell my kids to swing if it's even close. You don't rely on a subjective Ump call. **** HAPPENS! You certainly don't sit back and wait for more of it. You put the game in your hands not someone elses. And if you fail, so be it. You went out on your own terms and tried your best. YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by Bronco Yoda

I disagree. IMO It ALWAYS matters what you do. The coach needs to make it clear that every play counts. You play 60 min. not 59 min. & 30 seconds! You fight to the end not just almost the end. You give it your ALL not just 97.2% but 100%. Balls to the wall. Pedal to the metal. All hands on deck. Whatever...

You're making a different argument. That falls under the kneel down question. NOT the 3rd and 7 run play.

Originally Posted by Bronco Yoda

To use a baseball analogy here. You can't hit the ball if you don't swing!

Same here. This is far more fitting in the kneel down discussion. It doesn't apply here, where they actually ran a play and went with the odds. If you're stuck on baseball analogies, maybe bunting with a guy on base and no outs vs swinging away would be a better analogy.