Jump to content
LucasOilStadium

Colts Vs. Texans Game Day Thread

Recommended Posts

Because of the wonderful comeback, to me the tie would have BEEN a win, whereas the loss just feels so negative.  I disagree hugely with the decision, though I concede I understand the logic.  I still think if the thought WAS to go for it, then they should have done so the first time up when everybody just thought they were trying to draw them offside. 

 

Over it now, though, on to Foxboro. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

Because of the wonderful comeback, to me the tie would have BEEN a win, whereas the loss just feels so negative.  I disagree hugely with the decision, though I concede I understand the logic.  I still think if the thought WAS to go for it, then they should have done so the first time up when everybody just thought they were trying to draw them offside. 

 

Over it now, though, on to Foxboro. 

I concur. If it was on the other 45 it looks much better.  Plus you handed Houston a cheap win early in the year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JCPatriot said:

 

Guarantee, no, but barring something crazy a punt is very likely to result in a tie in that situation.  (There are no guarantees in the NFL.)  On the flip side, there is no guarantee that the Colts win if they convert and pick up the 1st down.  They still wouldn't have been in FG range, so they could have still tied even if they had converted the play.  So if you're weighing risk vs. reward, the reward if you convert is that you have a chance to win but it's reasonably likely that you still end up with a tie.  The risk if you don't convert is that you very likely lose.  Given that risk/reward breakdown, I would have punted if I was only thinking about this game in isolation.  If you look at the bigger picture and consider the standings, though, the situation changes.  1-2-1 isn't much better than 1-3.  You're ahead of the 1-3 teams but still behind the 2-2 teams.  Looking forward toward the playoffs, being ahead of the 1-3 teams probably doesn't help you much but being tied with the 2-2 teams could prove valuable.  Given that we probably have a loss coming up next week against NE, then being 2-3 is MUCH better than being 1-3-1 but being 1-3-1 isn't much better than being 1-4.  Basically, this team is at a point where you need to take some calculated risks if you are going to have a chance at making the playoffs.  They took one of those risks today, and it didn't pan out.  If this team was 3-0 and they did the same thing that they did today, I would be upset because they cost themselves half a game in the standings.  I would take 3-0-1 over 3-1 because it puts you ahead of all the 3-1 teams......which are teams that you may need to be ahead of at the end of the season.

This is exactly right. Given the percentages of making the playoffs...a tie would have been almost as bad as the loss....either way without the win we would have been a long shot to make the playoffs at the quarter post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is since the OT period has now been REDUCED to 10 minutes from 15 minutes, ties will now happen more often imo. They won't be as bad or rare as they used to be.

 

Of course you want to win at all cost. A win is much better than a loss or tie.

A tie is better than a lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ColtsSouljah said:

I love Reich, but he has A LOT of explaining to do.

Also, memo to all coaches: STOP GIVING KICKERS A SECOND CHANCE.

 

 If you want to ice him call it sooner. Don't give him a practice kick to get rid of his nerves. Dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Real NBA pundits, coaches and execs were parroting "Jump shooting teams cannot win in the NBA" and "You need low post presence to win" just like... 5-10 years ago. Data and analysis about the value of the 3 has been available for close to 20 years. You underestimate just how married people are to their old ways and how hard it is to teach the old dog new tricks, especially when this is all they've known for their whole lives and now you are telling them what they've been taught for 20-30-50 years is wrong. Some will adapt and flourish, most won't...    My favorite quote that encapsulates perfectly the situation comes from a field that is MUCH more open to new ideas than football - science. And even there, there is a long history of resistance to new ideas. Physicist Max Planck once said "Science advances one funeral at a time". What he meant was that science doesn't advance by convincing the old guard that the new ideas are correct, but by the old timers just dying out and the new generation unburdened by emotional attachments to the old stuff being allowed to just follow where the evidence points to.    BTW I do NOT think the run game is meaningless or that it doesn't have a role to play in today's game. It is extremely important in situational football, in end of game situations, in goalline and 3d and 4th and short situations, etc. I just do not think it serves anyone any good perpetuating myths about its importance for things that have been repeatedly shown to not correlate to run-game success.     
    • For those that wanted Suh, hes off the board.   https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/05/21/ndamukong-suh-expected-to-sign-with-buccaneers/
    • The problem is the secondary is really hard to watch from the angles we are getting on TV and the fans general population doesn't dissect in detail what's happening ... they just see the big plays - the interceptions, the big pass-breakups, or a big missed tackle etc... they don't see when the QB doesn't even throw the ball because of perfect coverage or threat of playmaking by players like Hooker. The real insane stat here is 1 reception per 130 snaps... that's like ... once every 2.5 games or thereabout... there is a value to what Hooker provides both as a playmaker and as a deterrent for opposing QB's even thinking about throwing deep. 
    • My gripe with Stitches view is these coaches have access to this same data that you're quoting. They have all kinds of stat men in the building with them.  I don't think they are oblivious to any of this stuff.  Then you've got actual football coaches in this forum like Coffedrinker and Princeton Tiger and very few of them really down play the importance of running the football and what it does for your passing game.  I just can't buy that all of them are just merely being stubborn and ignoring the data for age long myths.  I think there's a better reason why coaches still keep that mantra.
    • he got off to a slow start last year, but everyone had to notice his interception on eli and his solid play overall by the end of the year   fans just go by what they see, and that can change a lot week to week. 
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...