Take a knee...

[Eraserhead]

Take a knee...
Take a knee...
Kick a field goal...
Bengals win...

If only this was a perfect a universe where Lewis was not a complete moron...

[Adamantium]

(01-10-2016, 06:06 AM)SB50Champs Wrote: Take a knee...
Take a knee...
Kick a field goal...
Bengals win...

If only this was a perfect a universe where Lewis was not a complete moron...

Were they close enough to kick a field goal? 

[Brownshoe]

(01-10-2016, 06:33 AM)Adamantium Wrote: Were they close enough to kick a field goal? 

They were about at the 20 yard line

[Adamantium]

(01-10-2016, 06:34 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: They were about at the 20 yard line

Then Lewis is a f*cking idiot. 

[Sovereign Nation]

I have to disagree with you. Kneeling would not have done much except for make them burn their time outs and because of how little time on the play is gone, they would have had the ball with a lot of time left.

Kicking the FG would have been great, but they would have had over a minute and if you factor in the return we could have lost that game in other ways.

So running was the best play call. However, I am disgusted that Hill felt the need to get extra yardage. He got like 6-7 yards and if he goes down right there we burn 6 seconds, they burn a TO. We run again, if Hill doesn't convert, then another 6 seconds and a TO. Now we have 3rd and short, we pick up the 1st and game over, we don't they burn their final TO after about 6 seconds gone again. Kick the FG, and hope we get it. Now they need a TD with at least 18 ran off the clock and 0 TOs. If we miss the FG, then they still have 0 TO and we don't lose anything.

Hill's fumble is completely inexcusable, there was 0 need to fight for the extra yardage. Seems like out of all the players, he is the one that lost his composure the most after the hit on Gio. He seemed to feel that he had to prove something by getting a 1st down there. A 1st down run would have only made them burn a TO and we would have been able to run just a little bit more off the clock, would have been great, but not at all needed. I am sick, because I am just a fan. I am not a coach, nor a player, however I keep seeing players like Hill, not understand situational football and for them to make the money they do playing this game, they should know what to do in certain situations. For this one, Hill needed to be more concerned with securing the football and not worried about getting a big run.

[Arturo Bandini]

We would have had 3 points. The refs would have find a way to make Pitt win. That's it.

[Adamantium]

(01-10-2016, 08:01 AM)Sovereign Nation Wrote: I have to disagree with you.  Kneeling would not have done much except for make them burn their time outs and because of how little time on the play is gone, they would have had the ball with a lot of time left.

Kicking the FG would have been great, but they would have had over a minute and if you factor in the return we could have lost that game in other ways.

So running was the best play call.  However, I am disgusted that Hill felt the need to get extra yardage.  He got like 6-7 yards and if he goes down right there we burn 6 seconds, they burn a TO.  We run again, if Hill doesn't convert, then another 6 seconds and a TO.  Now we have 3rd and short, we pick up the 1st and game over, we don't they burn their final TO after about 6 seconds gone again.  Kick the FG, and hope we get it.  Now they need a TD with at least 18 ran off the clock and 0 TOs.  If we miss the FG, then they still have 0 TO and we don't lose anything.

Hill's fumble is completely inexcusable, there was 0 need to fight for the extra yardage.  Seems like out of all the players, he is the one that lost his composure the most after the hit on Gio.  He seemed to feel that he had to prove something by getting a 1st down there.  A 1st down run would have only made them burn a TO and we would have been able to run just a little bit more off the clock, would have been great, but not at all needed.  I am sick, because I am just a fan.  I am not a coach, nor a player, however I keep seeing players like Hill, not understand situational football and for them to make the money they do playing this game, they should know what to do in certain situations.  For this one, Hill needed to be more concerned with securing the football and not worried about getting a big run.

Well, if we would have been smart and kicked the extra point instead of going for 2, and THEN did what the TS proposed, we would have made them burn through at least 2 time outs AND been up by 4, forcing them to get a TD. I believe our defense could have held them under that circumstance.

[Gamma Ray Tan]

Yes, take a knee.....Bengals win. Jeremy Hill not a freaking moron...Bengals win . Marvin Lewis not our coach....Bengals win. So many possibilities.

[PV Bengal]

(01-10-2016, 09:47 AM)Gamma Ray Tan Wrote: Yes, take a knee.....Bengals win. Jeremy Hill not a freaking moron...Bengals win . Marvin Lewis not our coach....Bengals win. So many possibilities.

Actually, that call was on Hue, not Marvin. Marvin doesn't call the plays, Hue does.

We were up by 1 with about 1:45 remaining, I think. 3 knees results in 45 seconds being run off the clock (the majority of that time coming from the 3rd kneel-down).

From the 20, a FG would have been 38 yards. The Bengals would have been up by 4.

The Squealers then get the ball back (probably at their 20) with a minute to go and no time outs and needing a TD to win.

Bengals win. But the loss belongs squarely on Hue's shoulders.

[Gamma Ray Tan]

(01-10-2016, 11:22 AM)PV Bengal Wrote: Actually, that call was on Hue, not Marvin. Marvin doesn't call the plays, Hue does.

We were up by 1 with about 1:45 remaining, I think. 3 knees results in 45 seconds being run off the clock (the majority of that time coming from the 3rd kneel-down).

From the 20, a FG would have been 38 yards. The Bengals would have been up by 4.

The Squealers then get the ball back (probably at their 20) with a minute to go and no time outs and needing a TD to win.

Bengals win. But the loss belongs squarely on Hue's shoulders.

I'm sorry, but the Head Coach decides when to take a knee. That is not a "play", it is strategy. Totally Marvin's call there.

[Interceptor]

(01-10-2016, 06:37 AM)Adamantium Wrote: Then Lewis is a f*cking idiot. 

Well look who just woke up! 

[Housh]

If we settle for that FG There I think it's clear the refs would've helped Pitt at every turn to march them down the field. I agree with them in try to get a first and end the game.
Hill simply wasn't supposed to fumble there.

[Essex Johnson]

(01-10-2016, 11:27 AM)Gamma Ray Tan Wrote: I'm sorry, but the Head Coach decides when to take a knee. That is not a "play", it is strategy. Totally Marvin's call there.

I agree it should be the Head Coaches call but I don;t disagree with running the ball.. there was only one guarantee to end the game with Bengals victory that was achieving a first down.  If you are only go to assume we are going to make a field goal.. because percentages are in our favor with a 45 yarder or so.. the percentages are also in our favor that we are not going to fumble .

Both decisions have their merits and faults.  You can't predict the outcome of either except if you do get the first down, Bengals can run out the clock and Steelers do not get the ball back...    

As a coach you are more destined to do what will keep the ball in your hands and you control the end of the game.  Hill fumbled plain and simple and Bengals lost control of ending the game.. 

Whose to say Burfict hit on Brown does not come with Steelers driving for a TD.. or a inference call on a bomb that sets Steelers up for a TD try.  I actually think we have seen those types of plays in the NFL games late in the game than a fumble by the team ahead late.

[CKwi88]

Hindsight sure is 20/20.



Love the fans that complain that Marvin lets up, and then when he gives the offense the opportunity to win the game with a single first down, he's blasted.


It was the right call, 100%. Hill needs to hold onto that ball.

[Emphasis]

Hill's football security is suspect, and Burfict has trouble containing himself. Both problems are definitely not new to this team.

[fisherscatfan]

(01-10-2016, 09:42 AM)Adamantium Wrote: Well, if we would have been smart and kicked the extra point instead of going for 2, and THEN did what the TS proposed, we would have made them burn through at least 2 time outs AND been up by 4, forcing them to get a TD. I believe our defense could have held them under that circumstance.

There is not a coach on this earth that doesn't go for two.  I want Marvin fired for a lot of things but that is not one.  Now the play called was one of the worst possible calls.

[Gamma Ray Tan]

(01-10-2016, 12:06 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I agree it should be the Head Coaches call but I don;t disagree with running the ball.. there was only one guarantee to end the game with Bengals victory that was achieving a first down.  If you are only go to assume we are going to make a field goal.. because percentages are in our favor with a 45 yarder or so.. the percentages are also in our favor that we are not going to fumble .

Both decisions have their merits and faults.  You can't predict the outcome of either except if you do get the first down, Bengals can run out the clock and Steelers do not get the ball back...    

As a coach you are more destined to do what will keep the ball in your hands and you control the end of the game.  Hill fumbled plain and simple and Bengals lost control of ending the game.. 

Whose to say Burfict hit on Brown does not come with Steelers driving for a TD.. or a inference call on a bomb that sets Steelers up for a TD try.  I actually think we have seen those types of plays in the NFL games late in the game than a fumble by the team ahead late.

what's more likely... A fumbled snap or a RB fumble. Obviously both could happen, especially with weather as it was. Your logic would have them going for it on 4th down rather than kicking the field goal. But you know with greater certainty you will make Pitt burn all their TOs and kick a field goal, go up by 4 and make Pitt drive 80 yds with a backup QB or Ben who can't throw it 10 yds with no TOs. The choice seems pretty clear to me, but you are right Hill just blew it! I still think taking a knee was the safer decision in that situation.

[hitchopottimus]

If this situation were put before me as a hypothetical, I think there'd be a strong case for running the ball and trying to get a first down to ice the game, no question. The reason it was the wrong call has to do with knowing this team, and it's players, strengths and weaknesses, and the circumstances of the night. First, the circumstances: we're dealing with a wet, sloppy game, where both teams have been coughing up the ball like crazy. Even guarding the ball well, a fumble is likely. Second, you know Jeremy Hill isn't the most sure-handed guy out there. Third, and most important, your defense's strength is bend-don't-break. Great for the game as a whole. Horrible when you have to stop a team from getting into field goal range. Stopping a TD is what this defense is made to do. Stopping a FG? Not so much. All of that combined leads you to conclude that you shouldn't be running the ball with Hill. It's about making the correct call for your game and your team, not the textbook call all the time.

[Millhouse]

Ball was at the 26 on play that Hill fumbled. 3 knees later, the fg wouldve probably been around 45 yards. If they didnt have confidence in the kicker to make that when you are up by 1, then Nugent needs fired as much as anyone. That is the only excuse I can think of that makes running the ball in that situation acceptable.

[The Real Deal]

Nope because if nugent misses and or steelers score then everyone is bashing Marvin for being too conservative and playing not to lose.

You do exactly what the were planning on doing. Run it 3 times and try to get a first down. If you do,game over. If you don't you kick a fg and and take your chances with steelers having less time and no timeouts,more than likely needing to score a td.