That's Why You're in the Booth

[GhostRider]

I'm not surprised people are turning Belichick into a genius for McKelvin being an idiot and returning the ball.

There is validity to an onside kick as well as kicking it off.  It all depends on what you feel you can do defensively.

"turning Belichick into a genius"...whattya kiddin me?  This guy's been the best coach in the league year after year after superbowl year... He's right up there with guys like Bill Walsh and Vince Lombardi.  

[Biggs3535]

Surely he felt his D had a better than 10% chance with all TO's to stop them than going for the on-side. The fumble was a bonus, obvious

I'm not sure why, since Buffalo had scored on 3 of their 7 drives in the game.  That's 43%.

[GhostRider]

I'm not surprised people are turning Belichick into a genius for McKelvin being an idiot and returning the ball.

There is validity to an onside kick as well as kicking it off. It all depends on what you feel you can do defensively.

Wrong, Bill B has been a genius long before this past game. He makes the right decision in crunch situation almost 100% of the time, the better play there was to kick. If he didn't have any TO's then it would have been a different situation

As evidenced by the fact that any unknown assistant can play call his offense/defense and they still light it up.  Yet, when his assistants become HC's, they fail miserably.  Bill B is probably the greatest mind in all of football.

[Biggs3535]

I'm not surprised people are turning Belichick into a genius for McKelvin being an idiot and returning the ball.

There is validity to an onside kick as well as kicking it off. �It all depends on what you feel you can do defensively.

"turning Belichick into a genius"...whattya kiddin me? �This guy's been the best coach in the league year after year after superbowl year... He's right up there with guys like Bill Walsh and Vince Lombardi. �

You misunderstand.  I'm not commenting on Belichick's overall status as a coach.  I'm saying kicking the ball off wasn't some genius move as it is being portrayed in this thread.

[GhostRider]

I'm not surprised people are turning Belichick into a genius for McKelvin being an idiot and returning the ball.

There is validity to an onside kick as well as kicking it off. �It all depends on what you feel you can do defensively.

"turning Belichick into a genius"...whattya kiddin me? �This guy's been the best coach in the league year after year after superbowl year... He's right up there with guys like Bill Walsh and Vince Lombardi. �

You misunderstand.  I'm not commenting on Belichick's overall status as a coach.  I'm saying kicking the ball off wasn't some genius move as it is being portrayed in this thread.

Who said "genius move"?  You're bias is showing. 

[Biggs3535]

You're bias is showing. 

LMFWAO...

I'm not the guy who made a thread praising a head coach because a player on the opposite team is an idiot.  If anything, Jauron and his staff are at fault for making sure that numbnuts doesn't try to return a kick from the endzone.

Kicking the ball off or trying the onside kick were acceptable moves in that situation.

[GhostRider]

You're bias is showing.

LMFWAO...

I'm not the guy who made a thread praising a head coach because a player on the opposite team is an idiot. If anything, Jauron and his staff are at fault for making sure that numbnuts doesn't try to return a kick from the endzone.

Kicking the ball off or trying the onside kick were acceptable moves in that situation.

First, you missed the entire point of the thread.  And you seem to the the ONLY one who did.  Let that sink in for a moment.

Next, the onside kick is nowhere near as acceptable a decision as kicking it away.  Why execute a play with such a high risk and low chance of reward when your team has all 3 timeouts and the 2 minute warning?  If you're worried that your defense won't hold, it makes no sense to risk giving the opposing offense a short field. 

[ilovebeer]

I would be willing to bet Gruden isn't the only coach that would of onsided (is that a word?)  in that situation.  I mean if the offense gets 1 first down the game is over no matter if you kick it deep or not.  Gruden said to onside it because he likes that additional chance of getting the ball back.  

Edit - if you decide to OSK, and don't recover, you can still get the ball back if you stop them, but you run the risk of getting pinned back by your goalline.   

With that being said, I would of kicked it deep as well, but I also can see Grudens point of view.  


Also, I don't see how the OP came to the conclusion that Gru should  stay in the booth after that comment.

[keeponbucn]

I'm not sure why, since Buffalo had scored on 3 of their 7 drives in the game.  That's 43%.

Not how you project odds in that situation.

Buffalo scored 3 points in the 3rd and 7 in the 4th. The TD came after a lousy call which would have put Buffalo in a FG situation, Bill obviously thought his D was performing quite well throughout the game and given the data in front of you the better chance was to kick with all of the your TO's. On-side would have been retarded, you put the game in the hands of a 10% of succes play where as kicking it with all TO's gives you more control of what's called.

Only a moron would have on-sided

[MBF]

Bill B goes for most 4th downs depening on FP and Gruden punts from his 40 yrd line.

Gruden didn't have Tom Brady and Randy Moss.

[GhostRider]

Bill B goes for most 4th downs depening on FP and Gruden punts from his 40 yrd line.

Gruden didn't have Tom Brady and Randy Moss.

True enough.  If you have the best offensive weapons in all of football, you go for it on 4th and short.

[keeponbucn]

Gruden didn't have Tom Brady and Randy Moss.

I would be anything that Bill would go for it no matter the QB. Hell, he did it last year with Cassell at QB. It's more aggressive, I love it.

[Biggs3535]

I'm not sure why, since Buffalo had scored on 3 of their 7 drives in the game. �That's 43%.

Not how you project odds in that situation.

Now, this is funny.

It's evidently only OK to "project odds" in situations where they favor your own argument.  That's sweet.

Buffalo scored 3 points in the 3rd and 7 in the 4th. The TD came after a lousy call which would have put Buffalo in a FG situation, Bill obviously thought his D was performing quite well throughout the game and given the data in front of you the better chance was to kick with all of the your TO's. On-side would have been retarded, you put the game in the hands of a 10% of succes play where as kicking it with all TO's gives you more control of what's called.

Dude, Buffalo had the ball three times in the second half and scored twice.

And you might not want to take Buck It's word on the onside kicks success rate, it's actually a little over 20% since 2003.

Only a moron would have on-sided

LOL.

BB's shaft needs some lube.

[Biggs3535]

First, you missed the entire point of the thread.  And you seem to the the ONLY one who did.  Let that sink in for a moment.

No, I got the point of your thread - the right play was to kick it off, which isn't the case.

If the Pat's had kicked it off, and then stopped Buffalo's offense, then you have much, much more credibility with this thread.  As it is, the Pat's D only stopped Buffalo's offense once in the second half.

Next, the onside kick is nowhere near as acceptable a decision as kicking it away.  Why execute a play with such a high risk and low chance of reward when your team has all 3 timeouts and the 2 minute warning?  If you're worried that your defense won't hold, it makes no sense to risk giving the opposing offense a short field. 

First off, the success rate of an OSK is a little over 20% since 2003, not the 10% that you pulled out of your azz.

Both options have positives and negatives, it's not as cut and dry as you would like to portray it.  I doubt Belichick was counting on the moron trying to return a kick in the endzone first off, and then fumbling the ball on top of that.

[BUCarino]

What a stupid MORONIC thread!!  Do yourself a favor and delete it and retain some respectability, huh?

Gruden hater threads are the funniest I ever come across!  LMFAO!!

Like someone said it's all hindsight and Gruden gave his opinion.  Gruden has ALWAYS been a very successful HC in the NFL while I suspect the starter of this thread has a much lessor position in life, huh?

Gruden and Jaworski are the best thing to happen to the MNF booth in a very long time as they're both great commentators.  Also Gruden will be a HC next year in the NFL you can pretty much bank on that!

BTW, you do know that you're means you are right?  How does you are bias is showing even make sense then?