4th and Goal from the 3

[CrazedDogs]

 

Right because you think poor field position is somehow worth more than 3 points. You're not singing this song if they don't get in, none of us are. Don't pretend otherwise.

 

ha, well you don't know me that well then, I've long been an advocate for more aggressive fourth down calls.

 

And definitely in that situation, yeah. I loved that call.

 

If that was a top 5 D?.... then nah, take the 3. But against that team, inconsistent D, inconsistent offensive line play and a few play makers on O, I'm good with foregoing 3 points to strand them inside their 10.

 

And it was the difference in the game, so.....

 

 

 

I agree, if that ball was dropped we would be saying, why not just kick the field goal, or why would you ever pass in that situation.... and I think that 90% that is the right thought process. But I think he was sitting with this play in his pocket and it was the perfect situation for it.

 

well shit Gorilla, 3 yards out, the pass is a much safer bet, especially with that offensive line.

[GorillaNJ]

 

ha, well you don't know me that well then, I've long been an advocate for more aggressive fourth down calls.

 

And definitely in that situation, yeah. I loved that call.

 

If that was a top 5 D?.... then nah, take the 3. But against that team, inconsistent D, inconsistent offensive line play and a few play makers on O, I'm good with foregoing 3 points to strand them inside their 10.

 

And it was the difference in the game, so.....

 

 

well shit Gorilla, 3 yards out, the pass is a much safer bet, especially with that offensive line.

 

yes... but I was thinking of how the world lost their minds when Russel Wilson threw that INT in the endzone of the superbowl, and different situation for sure with the skill sets of the players and it was on second down....

[boohyah]

Jennings is just so average right now. Any of his long runs are so leaning on what the line does. Frankly perkins gives me more hope than jennings.

[boohyah]

 

ha, well you don't know me that well then, I've long been an advocate for more aggressive fourth down calls.

 

And definitely in that situation, yeah. I loved that call.

 

If that was a top 5 D?.... then nah, take the 3. But against that team, inconsistent D, inconsistent offensive line play and a few play makers on O, I'm good with foregoing 3 points to strand them inside their 10.

 

And it was the difference in the game, so.....

 

 

well shit Gorilla, 3 yards out, the pass is a much safer bet, especially with that offensive line.

You keep talking about their inferior offense, you realize we won by a point at home right, that was our offense put up those 21. Be an advocate all you want, if those points cost us the game, you're not on here telling us how happy you are,nor should you be. When the giants show us that this is the norm and we turn the corner, then this makes more sense.

 

This team has no running game and still turns the ball over too much, i don't agree on taking chances, we're not that good yet.

[Treehugger]

Jennings is pretty terrible at it though, you have to admit. Perkins has shown flashes

 

Sure, it shouldn't be in Jennings playbook at all but I didn't see Veeren or Bradshaw or anyone else show consistent sucess either. Most of our screens end as a tackle behind the LOS.

[CrazedDogs]

You keep talking about their inferior offense, you realize we won by a point at home right, that was our offense put up those 21. Be an advocate all you want, if those points cost us the game, you're not on here telling us how happy you are,nor should you be. When the giants show us that this is the norm and we turn the corner, then this makes more sense.

 

This team has no running game and still turns the ball over too much, i don't agree on taking chances, we're not that good yet.

 

booh, its kind of hard to have a decent discussion with you because you keep reading stuff wrong. I never said the Bengals had an inferior offense. I said they had a few playmakers and inconsistent line play. To elaborate, its the kind of offense that can move the ball well between the 20s, but squeeze the field on them and things get tougher for them than most other teams.

 

And I'm not the kind of spineless fuck that changes my opinion based on the outcome of one play. Obviously neither are you, which is cool, that's why you're here telling us its the wrong call even though it helped win the game. I just think you have it backwards on this. The Giants are not that good yet, true... but in this case, I think going for it was actually the smaller gamble. I know, this runs counter to the conventional wisdom. Well, I think the conventional wisdom is wrong. And there are quite a few football luminaries who agree with me on this too, which is why the conventional wisdom is gradually changing. So.... try to keep up, LOL.

[boohyah]

 

booh, its kind of hard to have a decent discussion with you because you keep reading stuff wrong. I never said the Bengals had an inferior offense. I said they had a few playmakers and inconsistent line play. To elaborate, its the kind of offense that can move the ball well between the 20s, but squeeze the field on them and things get tougher for them than most other teams.

 

And I'm not the kind of spineless fuck that changes my opinion based on the outcome of one play. Obviously neither are you, which is cool, that's why you're here telling us its the wrong call even though it helped win the game. I just think you have it backwards on this. The Giants are not that good yet, true... but in this case, I think going for it was actually the smaller gamble. I know, this runs counter to the conventional wisdom. Well, I think the conventional wisdom is wrong. And there are quite a few football luminaries who agree with me on this too, which is why the conventional wisdom is gradually changing. So.... try to keep up, LOL.

Ah well, if the luminaries said so..

[CrazedDogs]

well, who's opinion should carry more weight with me? Bill Belichick or Boohyah?

 

No offense booh, but I'm going with The Hoodie.

[Tempest]

I find the difference between Jennings and Perkins is this:

 

Jennings is hard to bring down, he can take two or three hits and sadly doesn't have the extra gear to break a big run. He is always been average and when we signed him we had below average players at RB.

 

Perkins is slightly faster and shifty. He will make guys miss and take off. Seems to play small like Tiki Barber, defensive linemen lose him in the forest of offensive linemen and before ya know it Barber slipped past.

 

I don't think Perkins is the guy based on what I have seen so far this season. We'll be going into next season asking the same question about the RB position.

[boohyah]

Inconsistent line play+very few playmakers=what exactly. I understand, its okay to fail on a 4th and 3, because you say the bengals just dont instill fear with offense to do anything with it. Right. Am i following?

[boohyah]

well, who's opinion should carry more weight with me? Bill Belichick or Boohyah?

 

No offense booh, but I'm going with The Hoodie.

Well clearly that's the wrong call

[boohyah]

I find the difference between Jennings and Perkins is this:

 

Jennings is hard to bring down, he can take two or three hits and sadly doesn't have the extra gear to break a big run. He is always been average and when we signed him we had below average players at RB.

 

Perkins is slightly faster and shifty. He will make guys miss and take off. Seems to play small like Tiki Barber, defensive linemen lose him in the forest of offensive linemen and before ya know it Barber slipped past.

 

I don't think Perkins is the guy based on what I have seen so far this season. We'll be going into next season asking the same question about the RB position.

 

No question, trust me what i said about perkins means he can be the man, they have to address rb in the offseason.

[Iceman_NYG]

i still think it was the wrong football decision with a whole Q to play ...........but i'm bloody delighted with the end result.

I think it was the right one for this exact same reason. We had a full quarter to play - we had it all planned out. Bengals were doing nothing on offense anyway and would be backed at their 3 yrd line to start anyway. So even if we didnt make it on 4th down - there was a very high probability that we would get the ball back with great field position to mount another drive where a FG would have been pretty much a gimme

[BlueInCanada]

I'm surprised to many were against it.

 

I thought it was a clear cut situation of "Time to man up" for MacAttack and the team.

 

Sure no points would of been a swing of momentum but I know I wasnt all that afraid of Dalton doing anything with it.

[Iceman_NYG]

 

yes... but I was thinking of how the world lost their minds when Russel Wilson threw that INT in the endzone of the superbowl, and different situation for sure with the skill sets of the players and it was on second down....

That was stupid because it WAS second down and they had Beastmode - possibly the best goal line back in the league. Hence it was stupid and it was from the 1yrd line - not 3

[CrazedDogs]

Well clearly that's the wrong call

Lol, you are confident, I will give you that.

[CrazedDogs]

Inconsistent line play+very few playmakers=what exactly. I understand, its okay to fail on a 4th and 3, because you say the bengals just dont instill fear with offense to do anything with it. Right. Am i following?

Not sure you are following. Line play is more important when the field gets small. Bengals offensive line was getting beat. I can list off a few other reasons, but what it adds up to is I think the odds of them picking up that td plus the odds of them being able to stop the Bengals deep in their own territory and get us another reasonable shot at at least 3 points were good enough that I say to take the risk.

 

It was a good opportunity to give the team some confidence too. That's the kind of play that can turn a team's season around.