Like aggressiveness but call that was plain foolish considering the score and field position.

I’m all for being aggressive. Let’s just wait until we cross midfield. Momentum is huge in football. Hang onto it and don’t give it up.

(09-12-2021, 11:17 PM)GodFather Wrote: I'll take the aggressive play calling over Marvins ultra conservative play calling. We wanted more aggressive play calling for years. Its not going to work every single time and we came away with the win so all is well in Bengaland.

How bout that 4th and 1 in overtime pass to CJ? How much would people be screaming if the play was incomplete? But it was aggressive and we won as a result. Love it!

The difference is, with that 4th and inches conversion to Uzo is there was 50-something seconds left in OT so it was so or die right there. Best we could do was tie to end the game. The 4th and fail from their own 30 was a momentum shifter that let the Vikings back in the game that COULD and should have been avoided given the circumstances!

I like some of ZT’s fourth down calls but some have been really boneheaded. Remember Andy’s option run fail on fourth down a couple years ago?

I'm all for being aggressive. But that was dumb. The defense was playing well. It's stupid to go for it in field position that guarantees the opponent a score. It's stupid to do it with that play when they weren't winning the line of scrimmage on short yardage.

I get that he wanted his offense to make statement at that point. But we had everything going our way until then and he handed the opponent an opportunity to make statement and collect easy points. Dumb.

(09-12-2021, 11:29 PM)The D.O.Z. Wrote: The difference is, with that 4th and inches conversion to Uzo is there was 50-something seconds left in OT so it was so or die right there. Best we could do was tie to end the game. The 4th and fail from their own 30 was a momentum shifter that let the Vikings back in the game that COULD and should have been avoided given the circumstances!

I like some of ZT’s fourth down calls but some have been really boneheaded. Remember Andy’s option run fail on fourth down a couple years ago?

That’s not true. If the 4th down failed the Vikings had plenty of time and timeouts to get into field goal position and win. And most likely that would’ve happened. Their kicker proved he could kick with the overtime FG. So that was also a very risky call when a QB sneak would’ve easily gotten a first down.

(09-13-2021, 01:36 AM)GodFather Wrote: That’s not true. If the 4th down failed the Vikings had plenty of time and timeouts to get into field goal position and win. And most likely that would’ve happened. Their kicker proved he could kick with the overtime FG. So that was also a very risky call when a QB sneak would’ve easily gotten a first down.

Right. I said best WE could do was tie.

Analytics suggest it was basically a pick ‘em. I don’t mind the decision to go for it. I found the specific play call crappy though.

The highest percentage play is just the QB sneak. If you’re not going to do that, then be creative. They made up for it in overtime.

(09-12-2021, 09:45 PM)Trademark Wrote: I know a lot of people are criticizing it, but we have wanted an aggressive team for a while, so I don't mind the aggressive play calls at times. I did hate all of the run plays when we have offensive weapons galore, but regardless a win is a win.

I hated the 4th down call when we were up by two TDs.  I believe I heard Burrow audibled to that pass on 4th and an inch, in what case that dude must need a wheelbarrow to transport his balls around.  

(09-12-2021, 10:06 PM)PlayadLc Wrote: According to the analytics, going for it there versus punting was basically a toss up, with a very slight lean toward going for it. I know that you can't just follow that off a cliff, but it wasn't a crazy decision IMO. And it probably would have been converted if Mixon didn't stumble in the backfield.

I want a coach that trusts his team and plays to win instead of not to lose. Sometimes it'll end badly, but I think it will be a benefit over the course of the season.

Stopped reading after the bold above.  It was absolutely a crazy decision based on the field position and how the game was being played at the time.  With the defense playing well there is zero reason to risk a momentum change with a short field.

In the NFL a punt is not necessarily a bad thing, especially when you're up 14 points and controlling the game.  That stupid little decision by ZT completely changed momentum and turned the game around for the Vikings - he's very lucky the Vikes fumbled away the game at the end.

I too like being aggressive but being stupid I don't.

I am a fan of “pro aggressive” play calling and “zagging” in the chess match of NFL play calling, but I was not in favor of that decision at all, even if it had succeeded. It seemed analogous to playing Madden on PlayStation. Like others have said, the variables of field position, score, and the defense factored into my stance here. Although I thought it was careless, I believe the thought was to put the proverbial foot on their throat and go for the kill. The other decision on 4th down I was all for.

(09-12-2021, 09:45 PM)Trademark Wrote: I know a lot of people are criticizing it, but we have wanted an aggressive team for a while, so I don't mind the aggressive play calls at times. I did hate all of the run plays when we have offensive weapons galore, but regardless a win is a win.

difference between aggressive and stupid that was just stupid...  (3rd Qtr 4th down call when up by 2 TDs and defense is playing well) 

That changed the momentum of the game and allowed the vikings to climb right back in it.


The one in OT worked but we should have never been there to begin with

The call was just fine, the play design was criminal. Go Under center.

(09-12-2021, 11:17 PM)GodFather Wrote: I'll take the aggressive play calling over Marvins ultra conservative play calling. We wanted more aggressive play calling for years. Its not going to work every single time and we came away with the win so all is well in Bengaland.

How bout that 4th and 1 in overtime pass to CJ? How much would people be screaming if the play was incomplete? But it was aggressive and we won as a result. Love it!

in OT with 30 seconds left is the prefect time to make that call..

3rd Qtr up by 2 TDs on your own 30... Even Pee Wee coaches know better.

(09-13-2021, 09:58 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: in OT with 30 seconds left is the prefect time to make that call..

3rd Qtr up by 2 TDs on your own 30... Even Pee Wee coaches know better.

Burrow audibled, Zac would of ran another stretch play and got stuffed.  

(09-13-2021, 10:00 AM)740Bengal Wrote: Burrow audibled, Zac would of ran another stretch play and got stuffed.  

No idea what plays were called.  But we probly be better the less decisions zach gets to make.

(09-13-2021, 10:02 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: No idea what plays were called.  But we probly be better the less decisions zach gets to make.

10000% agree! The man is some incompetent it's criminal. 

I liked it! Good job coach Zak!

I wasn't able to watch the game, but listened on satellite radio. Going for it on 4th there is as close as I've ever heard Lapham to flat out disagreeing with a Bengals play call. Several times thereafter he referenced that call to allowing the Vikings back in the game. If Lapham or Hobspin are critical, it's not a good call.

This particular call on fourth down didn’t bother me as much as being in so many fourth down situations in the first place.

(09-13-2021, 07:54 AM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: Analytics suggest it was basically a pick ‘em. I don’t mind the decision to go for it. I found the specific play call crappy though.

The highest percentage play is just the QB sneak. If you’re not going to do that, then be creative. They made up for it in overtime.

Your odds of success were good statistically like you said. Situationally there was really no reason to go for it there. Defense playing well and already with a lead.