+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? (/thread-33088.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - bfine32 - 09-13-2022
(09-13-2022, 03:56 PM)michaelsean Wrote: No he just falls on it and try again.
Why not try to make a play? Either way it's 3rd down
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - THE PISTONS - 09-13-2022
I guess all the bad decision/plays in the game weren't enough for some...
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - THE PISTONS - 09-13-2022
(09-13-2022, 05:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Why not try to make a play? Either way it's 3rd down
Yeah. I would have ran a play there.
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - michaelsean - 09-13-2022
(09-13-2022, 05:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Why not try to make a play? Either way it's 3rd down
Yeah that’s true
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - Essex Johnson - 09-13-2022
(09-13-2022, 05:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Why not try to make a play? Either way it's 3rd down
we were position to kick FG, with the snapper i thought a good move just in case a really bad snap... you have Mac, why take a chance for fumble, int , sack penalty.. let kick and win
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - motoarch - 09-13-2022
(09-13-2022, 05:24 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: i don;t see it that way, unless im wrong we had a timeout still put it in Pittsburgh hands, we had a possibility of actually getting the ball back with a short field and a last second FG for the win.
The only way Bengals get the ball back is a turnover.
1:04 on the clock. And they would only have needed about 20 or so yards to get into field goal range.
Run 14 more seconds off and try to pin them back as close as you can to the goal line make them go further with less time.
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - bfine32 - 09-13-2022
(09-13-2022, 06:26 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: we were position to kick FG, with the snapper i thought a good move just in case a really bad snap... you have Mac, why take a chance for fumble, int , sack penalty.. let kick and win
Because the snap was off. Sack or penalty really doesn't matter.
But as I said: It's perfect hindsight vision. Huber and Mac tried to make a play
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - NUGDUKWE - 09-13-2022
(09-13-2022, 12:54 PM)740Bengal Wrote: 4th and 16, a punt guarantees a tie and most likely a loss, which is like kissing your sister, am I the only one who wanted to go for it?
Not for the 4th and 16. But just watched Joe goodberrys Bengals on the brain. Which if anyone doesn't know about that it comes on at Tuesdays at 8 and I really enjoy those. But he brought up the point that when we got down to the 12 yd line in overtime we basically settled on a field goal again. A run up the middle for nothing and a two yard pass to sample. We should've just dropped burrow back twice if not 3 times and see what he could do. He struggled early but he had thrown at least 4 would be game winners in the last 4 mins of the game. The chances were probably higher of him doing it again vs making the field goal with Wilcox snapping.
He usually has some different takes and one that caught me by surprise was he thought rewatching the game the oline played better in the first half vs the 2nd half. Said he thought like anyone watching the game that it seemed the oline settled down and played better in the 2nd half. But it seemed the difference was more Burrow reading the defense better and having better answers for what the defense was doing.
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - rfaulk34 - 09-13-2022
(09-13-2022, 01:56 PM)740Bengal Wrote: I say run a fake punt, no one would of expected that IMO, sometimes you gotta let your Nu$% hang out.
Except that Pitt only had single coverage on the gunners and 2 guys in the middle of the field, to protect against a fake.
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - Johnny Cupcakes - 09-13-2022
(09-13-2022, 01:32 PM)motoarch Wrote: You don't go for it with that field position and just over a minute left.
You run as much clock as you can then punt.
Bengals forgot run off clock though, which was really stupid.
This is the correct answer, regardless of the “kissing your sister” attitude about it. I’m the situation that played out, you punt and play for the tie, because it’s better than a loss, and at that point, is your best likely outcome.
A tie can get you into the playoffs…just like it did for Pittsburgh last season.
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - rfaulk34 - 09-13-2022
(09-13-2022, 05:24 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: i don;t see it that way, unless im wrong we had a timeout still put it in Pittsburgh hands, we had a possibility of actually getting the ball back with a short field and a last second FG for the win.
Pitt got the ball with :56 seconds and the Bengals did not have any timeouts left.
RE: Did anyone else want to go for it in Overtime? - rfaulk34 - 09-13-2022
Couple things that aren't being talked about, one i recall was mentioned: Flowers was in perfect position to pick biscuit on 1st down of pitt's last drive in OT then Hubbard jumped but couldn't even get the QB down, unabated--which brings me to my next point. Why wasn't the whistle blown when Hubbard had a free shot on the QB? The T did get a hand on Hubbard but not enough to stop him from going right around him.
Oh, and Bates missed a tackle that gave the TE 6 more yards on that play.
I guess there's just not enough time in the week to discuss all of the Bengals gaffes on Sunday.