I don't mind the 4th down call

[*bfine32*]

(09-13-2021, 01:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You could just as easily argue that he had no faith in our defense.

If he trusted our D then why gamble when he did not have to?

I guess someone could argue that if they wanted 

But here's how the QB of our D saw it:

https://www.bengals.com/news/what-zac-taylor-joe-burrow-the-bengals-said-after-the-week-1-win-over-the-viking

Quote:Do you guys think you were more aggressive on defense this year with the blitzing and everything than you were last year?


"I think everyone's more aggressive. I mean, coach called going for it on fourth-and-one on the 30-yard line. That's aggressive. That's the head coach making decisions, and telling us that we came to win. We're letting our bullets go this year — we ain't holding back nothing."

He doesn't seem too insulted. 

[XenoMorph]

(09-13-2021, 02:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I guess someone could argue that if they wanted 

But here's how the QB of our D saw it:

https://www.bengals.com/news/what-zac-taylor-joe-burrow-the-bengals-said-after-the-week-1-win-over-the-viking


He doesn't seem too insulted. 

except we were winning and almost lost cause of that decision

[*bfine32*]

(09-13-2021, 02:31 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: except we were winning and almost lost cause of that decision

As I said: Folks are missing the big picture. Zac sent a message and the team seems to love his faith in them.

FWIW I almost got laid by Selma Hayek

[Benton]

So the biggest argument seems to be that it was the wrong call because we had the lead. Only issue there is, you don't know you're going to have the lead later

If we punted the ball there and ended up losing the game by a score, the majority of threads here would be filled posts about Zac being gutless and how he should've went for it on fourth down, how were always be a bad team with weak coaches, etc.

Pick a lane. Most people wanted a coach that wasn't going to take his foot off the gas. We got it.

[The D.O.Z.]

(09-13-2021, 01:44 PM)MileHighGrowler Wrote: I think it's two different scenarios.  One, you're up, defense is playing well, need to burn time, momentum is working in your favor and you give up some really bad field position if you don't convert.  The other, you're in OT, against the clock, need to spark it and put your foot on the gas to keep it going.  It's fully possible to like one call and not the other, and to realize they were different points in the game.  Additionally, if Burrow changed the last one at the line, who knows what Zac had put in as the play initially which could have ended just as poorly as the first attempt.  

This sums up my exact train of thought on this subject! Thank you!

[fredtoast]

(09-13-2021, 02:43 PM)Benton Wrote: Pick a lane. Most people wanted a coach that wasn't going to take his foot off the gas. We got it.

Funny thing about that.  When I ask fans for just one single example of a game we lost because Marvin "took his foot off the gas" they can't come up with one.

But I can always point to the '10 Tampa Bay game to prove how stupid it is to "keep your foot on the gas" with a lead in the 4th quarter.

If we were in a shoot-out I might understand going for it.  But with a 14 point lead and a defense that has only allowed one score in the third quarter you should punt.

[XenoMorph]

(09-13-2021, 02:43 PM)Benton Wrote: So the biggest argument seems to be that it was the wrong call because we had the lead. Only issue there is, you don't know you're going to have the lead later

If we punted the ball there and ended up losing the game by a score, the majority of threads here would be filled posts about Zac being gutless and how he should've went for it on fourth down, how were always be a bad team with weak coaches, etc.

Pick a lane. Most people wanted a coach that wasn't going to take his foot off the gas. We got it.

up 14 points and your defense is playing very very well.... You let your defense continue to play well.   Instead of putting them in a tight spot make the other team work 70-80 yards for points not give them freebies.

no one would blame zach for punting up by 2 tds

[Murdock2420]

FYI, Bates seemed to mind the 4th down call.

Bates admitted he was pissed after Zac went for it on fourth down and it resulted in the 21-7 lead going to 21-14. "Not a lot of people were happy with the call." But he said Zac pulled everybody together on sideline and said this is what we're going to be: aggressive.

— Jay Morrison (@JayMorrisonATH) September 13, 2021

[Bengalitis]

(09-13-2021, 04:49 PM)Murdock2420 Wrote: FYI, Bates seemed to mind the 4th down call.

Bates admitted he was pissed after Zac went for it on fourth down and it resulted in the 21-7 lead going to 21-14. "Not a lot of people were happy with the call." But he said Zac pulled everybody together on sideline and said this is what we're going to be: aggressive.

— Jay Morrison (@JayMorrisonATH) September 13, 2021

There you have it!   Being aggressive. Damn you Zac!   

[Murdock2420]

(09-13-2021, 04:52 PM)Bengalitis Wrote: There you have it!   Being aggressive. Damn you Zac!   

Being aggressive is a good thing, but you also have to be smart about when you do it. Up two scores at your 30....that's a dangerous place to be aggressive. 

I think it's easy to look back now and talk about it since the team came back and won in overtime but if the Vikings win that game, everyone on here would be pointing to that moment and hammering Taylor for the decision.

[fredtoast]

(09-13-2021, 04:52 PM)Bengalitis Wrote: There you have it!   Being aggressive. Damn you Zac!   

I don't care about a coach being aggressive. I want a coach who wins.

The best coaches don't gamble when they don't have to.

[Frank Booth]

(09-13-2021, 04:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't care about a coach being aggressive. I want a coach who wins.

The best coaches don't gamble when they don't have to.

Belichik never has a problem punting the ball, pinning the opposition deep, and letting the defense handle the work

[JaggedJimmyJay]

(09-13-2021, 05:15 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: Belichik never has a problem punting the ball, pinning the opposition deep, and letting the defense handle the work

Belichick has been notorious for his entire career for going for it on 4th down under seemingly atypical circumstances.

People love invoking his name to support arguments they made up.

[MileHighGrowler]

(09-13-2021, 02:43 PM)Benton Wrote: So the biggest argument seems to be that it was the wrong call because we had the lead. Only issue there is, you don't know you're going to have the lead later

If we punted the ball there and ended up losing the game by a score, the majority of threads here would be filled posts about Zac being gutless and how he should've went for it on fourth down, how were always be a bad team with weak coaches, etc.

Pick a lane. Most people wanted a coach that wasn't going to take his foot off the gas. We got it.

It's possible that they punt and it's returned for a TD.  Or the Vikings had an amazing drive.  Anything is possible.  But no way would I call Zac chicken if he'd punted it there.  No way would I have questioned what to me was a super obvious call given the situation as it was at that point in the game.  

And I don't like the argument at all that it was a morale/confidence booster.  The other side of that same coin is the disrespect he showed to his defense that had been showing up all day.  

At the end of the day, water under the bridge because they won.  Awesome to see the team as a whole playing better, some exciting plays, fans being back into it after last year's weirdness in the stadium.  My confidence in what the team can accomplish if given the chance has increased.  But my confidence in ZT has not grown at all and I still think he's the weak link.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(09-13-2021, 05:15 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: Belichik never has a problem punting the ball, pinning the opposition deep, and letting the defense handle the work

https://t.co/MLc74nNAa8 pic.twitter.com/9FGHKgKlfP

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) September 13, 2021

Just to be clear I’m not defending Taylor here (I didn’t like the call), but to say “Belichick would never do that” is wrong.

[Frank Booth]

(09-13-2021, 05:23 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote:

https://t.co/MLc74nNAa8 pic.twitter.com/9FGHKgKlfP

— Goodberry (@JoeGoodberry) September 13, 2021

Just to be clear I’m not defending Taylor here (I didn’t like the call), but to say “Belichick would never do that” is wrong.

I’m confident Bill would’ve used his excellent punter(pats always have a great punter) and let his defense handle a struggling offense(Miami is not a good offense, and Minny was struggling)

When you have a great punter and a defense firing on all cylinders, you punt it.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(09-13-2021, 05:26 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: I’m confident Bill would’ve used his excellent punter(pats always have a great punter) and let his defense handle a struggling offense(Miami is not a good offense, and Minny was struggling)

When you have a great punter and a defense firing on all cylinders, you punt it.

I don’t disagree, but look at that situation the tweet referenced where he went for it against Indy. Definitely surprising coming from Belichick.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

This is one of those situations where I trust analytics a lot more than I trust the prevailing philosophies of fans. In this case the analytics are essentially a push, so either decision is justifiable.

Fans have a significant bias from their own flawed understanding of probabilities (this isn't just me saying things, this is backed up by decades of cognitive scientific research starting with Kahneman and Tversky) and their incomplete pictures of the relationships between what can happen and what does happen. "Common sense" in this case is better described as "common misconception".

Coaches are taking 4th down risks much more often than they used to league-wide because that's what the analytics tend to recommend, and this incident is an extension of that philosophy.

[spazz70]

Just listening to Dehener on 700 WLW.....He said it was a total analytics play and actually was the correct play.... He said it had a 1% higher win rate than punting and playing defense.

[BengalsRocker]

(09-13-2021, 05:45 PM)spazz70 Wrote: Just listening to Dehener on 700 WLW.....He said it was a total analytics play and actually was the correct play.... He said it had a 1% higher win rate than punting and playing defense.

and... ?

Why the hell don't teams do this kind of stuff all of the time then?

It can't be that great of a decision.