Hue Jackson called a run play on the last offensive snap

[C0de_M0nkey]

(11-24-2015, 12:32 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am sure pretty much everyone would complain about a 40 yard bomb from the 25 yard line.

It was about 40 yards in the air give or take a few.

[fredtoast]

I am not claiming that it was the best call. All I am pointing out is the hypocrisy of the people who are always complaining about playing conservative and going for the tie instead of the win.

[C0de_M0nkey]

(11-24-2015, 12:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am not claiming that it was the best call.  All I am pointing out is the hypocrisy of the people who are always complaining about playing conservative and going for the tie instead of the win.

People are complaining because we took one shot at the end zone instead going for the first down and taking four shots at the end zone.

[Fresno B]

(11-24-2015, 12:51 PM)C0de_M0nkey Wrote: People are complaining because we took one shot at the end zone instead going for the first down and taking four shots at the end zone.

That. And the fact that Dalton didn't throw a good pass.

[fredtoast]

(11-24-2015, 12:51 PM)C0de_M0nkey Wrote: People are complaining because we took one shot at the end zone instead going for the first down and taking four shots at the end zone.

And these people do not realize that we don't automatically convert every single third and 2 by running the ball.

That is the gift of hindsight.  You are never wrong.

[C0de_M0nkey]

(11-24-2015, 01:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And these people do not realize that we don't automatically convert every single third and 2 by running the ball.

That is the gift of hindsight.  You are never wrong.

Complete strawman. It's possible to go for the first down without running up the middle. We could have thrown a high percentage pass play designed to get two yards. A low percentage deep fade to the corner of the end zone is objectively worse than a two yard run, pass or screen play in that situation.

If you get the first down you're more likely to score a touchdown because you have more opportunities to do so. If you don't get the first down you can kick the same field goal with less time on the clock. If we would have run the ball and lost in overtime, not one person on this message board would be saying that we should have thrown a deep fade to the endzone on that play instead.

[3wt]

(11-24-2015, 01:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And these people do not realize that we don't automatically convert every single third and 2 by running the ball.

That is the gift of hindsight.  You are never wrong.

Though I was critical of the call to begin with it is worth noting that Hue has said that it was his call in the first place, and he'd do it again: 

“Oh my God, we have our best player against -- their best corner was on the sideline. He was done,” Jackson said. “So you've got your best player out on the field and the safety is standing in the middle of the field, so you've got to take that shot. Game over. On something which a lot of people would say is routine, we missed. I mean, we're going to always stay aggressive.”

I admit I was furious about the call and felt that the run was the higher percentage play that would have resulted in less time for Palmer to dissect our defense.   But Hue is the professional here and his quote supports his professional opinion that the throw to AJ was the higher percentage play with the best possible outcome.  And you're right I have often complained that the Bengals don't play to win but not to lose.

Imagine that.  I don't know as much as the guys that get paid...

[*Nately120*]

(11-24-2015, 12:05 PM)C0de_M0nkey Wrote: If Andy wanted to go for the kill he should have gotten the first down. Then we could have gone for the kill at least four more times.

Andy went for the kill and blew it, it happens.  Besides, we were playing against the #1 offense in the NFL and Palmer and Arians play a form of football that is so aggressive it is downright reckless at times (remember, they scored 21 points while we went a total of -1 yards).  This is where the big difference between these two (very good) teams lies.  Palmer can audible to a 40+ yard bomb on 3rd and 3 and Dalton attempts to continue to take advantage of AJ beating Patrick Peterson's backup and we lose our collective minds.

We need to mentally separate being disappointed with the result/execution from being disappointed by the decision.  Lord help this message board's bandwidth (or whatever it is) if we run it and fail and we look at the tape and see Andy NOT having the confidence, swagger, leadership blah blah blah to SEE and EXPLOIT AJ on some backup bum that keeps getting beat.  I'm just saying.

Anyways, I get the disappointment, but it's almost like people want this to be a confident team that puts its foot on the gas and never lets up and curb-stomps opponents, and punches them in the mouth, and imposes their will upon them, and pushes the envelope BUT only if it's going to be safe and work.

[reuben.ahmed]

Running for the 1st down has the added benefit of running down the clock (miss it or not).

It was an OK playcall given the situation, best playfake all year, Andy couldn't execute - AJ almost made up for it.

In a similar situation I hope they run it. Actually, I thought that was a situation to run it on 3rd and 4th. If they stop us, they win. Bengals need that type of pressure experience, and they have the team to run when they want/need to.

Leveon Bell, 4th down with no time left, direct snap. That's how you ball, Bengals had that game in their pocket.

Hue can say anything he wants, there is situation football, risks/odds/rewards. The reason he's getting mad at the question is he knew there was a better option. If not, go deep to AJ every play. Not everyone is good as Peterson.

[fredtoast]

(11-24-2015, 04:36 PM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: Leveon Bell, 4th down with no time left, direct snap. That's how you ball, 

If I were you I would look for  better example than Tomlin.  He gave away the Ravens game this year with his stupid fourth down calls.

[*rfaulk34*]

(11-24-2015, 11:56 AM)fredtoast Wrote: That's funny.  I could have sworn that Belichick was such a great coach because he always "played to win instead of not to lose".

Marvin is a bum because he is too conservative until we play aggressive and lose.

Aggressiveness really shouldn't be a comparison between these two. Belichick practices situational football more than anyone and he's always prepared to make the right decision. He may go off the board at times, i.e., @Indy going for it on 4th, but you never hear about bad clock management with the Patriots.

[*Nately120*]

(11-24-2015, 04:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If I were you I would look for  better example than Tomlin.  He gave away the Ravens game this year with his stupid fourth down calls.

Tomlin also went for a win via RB because he didn't fancy taking a crappy backup QB in Vick into overtime and would rather risk Bell getting it done.  If Ben is in that game they probably kick the FG, tie it, go into OT and have faith the offense will get another shot to win it.

[reuben.ahmed]

That's true, but I'm using it as an example. I hate to use Tomlin as a good example for anything related to clock management since he might be worse than the Bengals.

I would have preferred a run on 3rd and 4th (if necessary) over that pass, in hindsight, clock would get diminished. I still stand by the Bengals had the game in their pocket with the way Gio was running.

Lowest possible outcome with a run, OT.
Lowest possible outcome with a pass, lose the game.

Anything can happen, but those are the odds with normal plays occurring. I think they were going to score a TD on that drive with no time left, either way an OT game would have been exciting to watch at least, compared to Palmer's last drive.

[wolfkaosaun]

It's funny. The offense is getting more blame than what the defense did with 1:06 left in the game.

Sure wish Andy Dalton would have been able to stop one of Palmer's passes to Fitz.

[fredtoast]

(11-25-2015, 04:31 AM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: It's funny. The offense is getting more blame than what the defense did with 1:06 left in the game.

Sure wish Andy Dalton would have been able to stop one of Palmer's passes to Fitz.

The more I think about it, that just might be the reason they went for the win.

They knew that their defensive backfield was decimated with injuries and they would not be able to stop the Cardinals in overtime.

[CornerBlitz]

I didn't have a problem with the audible by Dalton one bit. He wanted to go for the jugular and it almost worked. In retrospect everyone is right; Bernard had an easy first down but I like the aggressiveness and confidence Dalton is showing. Yes we lost and it sucked but overall i wasn't that disappointed. We lost to the best team in the NFC on the road in prime time by a field goal. I can live with that.

[C0de_M0nkey]

There's playing aggressively then there's playing recklessly. There's playing for the win then there's praying for the win. When Andy decided to put the game on a jump ball in that situation he did the latter. Throwing a slant would have been aggressive. Throwing a jump ball to the corner of the end zone was reckless.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(11-25-2015, 10:16 AM)C0de_M0nkey Wrote: There's playing aggressively then there's playing recklessly. There's playing for the win then there's praying for the win. When Andy decided to put the game on a jump ball in that situation he did the latter. Throwing a slant would have been aggressive. Throwing a jump ball to the corner of the end zone was reckless.

It wouldn't have been reckless had he made an accurate throw.  It was aggressive with poor execution.  EVERY QB makes bad throws....it happens.  The great ones do it less often.....good ones do it here and there....average ones do it half of the time.....and then there's guys like Krapernick or Foles......and rookies.

[wolfkaosaun]

(11-25-2015, 04:56 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The more I think about it, that just might be the reason they went for the win.

They knew that their defensive backfield was decimated with injuries and they would not be able to stop the Cardinals in overtime.

Exactly. Which is why I have no problem for going for the TD. They were in field goal range, Peterson was out, and it was one on one coverage against Green.

Not the best throw, but it was there.

They could have run it, 1st down. Throw is a little higher, touchdown.

Hindsight. 20/20. But this team has shown they can fight back against anyone.

[XenoMorph]

(11-25-2015, 10:16 AM)C0de_M0nkey Wrote: There's playing aggressively then there's playing recklessly. There's playing for the win then there's praying for the win. When Andy decided to put the game on a jump ball in that situation he did the latter. Throwing a slant would have been aggressive. Throwing a jump ball to the corner of the end zone was reckless.

not much reckless about trying to give your #1 guy a chance to make the play one on one.