When we scored with well over a minute to go, we were toast.
I know a TD in that situation is never guaranteed. But leaving that much time on the clock with the opponent having a TO and needing only about 30 yards to kick a FG to win the game, well that is loser.
One run, pushing the clock under a minute would been huge. Heck it might have forced Carolina to use their TO. And we still would have multiple chances to score.
I still remember Coughln, embarrassing himself at the end of the SB and almost allowing Brady enough time to come back.
Like I said, the TD was NOT guaranteed. But the leaving all the time on clock put that game in the loss column. That is not debatable.
What if Barkley gets stopped at the 1 and we don't score on 4 tries from there?
You can't turn down the points there. If you're down by 2, maybe you run some clock and win it with a short FG. But, you can't ignore scoring just because there might be too much time left.
I saw it coming a mile away
What if Barkley gets stopped at the 1 and we don't score on 4 tries from there?
You can't turn down the points there. If you're down by 2, maybe you run some clock and win it with a short FG. But, you can't ignore scoring just because there might be too much time left.
100% correct.
Coughlin didn't instruct his team to not go in the end zone. Apparently Eli yelled at Bradshaw at the last second to go down at the 1 but he couldn't stop.
Personally, I had no problem with the TD since a bad snap or block could sink you but if the Pats had scored Coughlin would have gotten serious heat.
Which part of your ass did you pull that out of?
We had this game and the refs handed it back ..
Not too mention the odds of a 63 yard FG
GUYS PLAYED HARD but they need to do a better job at wrapping up and finishing a tackle .
In his book, he talks about how he threw that 2nd ring into the Ohio River out of disgust.
Yes, I figured there was too much time left on the clock. But what was the alternative? A chance at failing to get the TD and losing 30-24? They aren't good enough to fiddle with the clock to kill time.(neither is any team)
Get your fucking facts straight before you start proclaiming things aren't debatable.
Your grammatical errors and complete lack of sense make your post beyond absurd.
But keep it coming. Can't wait for your next opus.
The faster we accept this team for what it is the better we will be on Mondays.
See you guys Thurs
Get your fucking facts straight before you start proclaiming things aren't debatable.
Your grammatical errors and complete lack of sense make your post beyond absurd.
But keep it coming. Can't wait for your next opus.
They did only need 30 yards for a FG. The ball started at their own 25, they advanced it to the Giants' 45 to kick the 63 yard FG. That's 30 yards.
That's actually something I thought about with regard to the fact they now move the ball out to the 25 instead of the 20 after touchbacks on kickoffs. That, plus the fact that NFL kickers these days have ranges about 10-15 yards longer than they used to, plus the fact that the game has gotten insanely offense-friendly, all means that if you just need a FG at the end of a game you are going to have a way better chance than teams used to have.
Either way, defense still has to get a stop.
That's absurd IMO. The correct move strategically was the play that was called and got them the TD. I mean it worked didn't it?
This is the same team people were crucifying for not scoring TDs and now when they drive down the field late, score a go ahead TD, there's complaints they did it too quick?
As said before, if they're down 1 or 2 and could run the clock down and play for a winning chip shot FG it's a different story but they NEEDED a TD and that's the first and only priority.
I don't understand how anyone doesn't get this. It's football 101.
Yes, it seems the defense can't really stop anyone in the fourth quarter.....but that is not on the offense....
There's never any closure with this team.
Again, I get it, we needed a TD, and if you try to run some clock before scoring, you may not score. Based on the outcome of the game, scoring on first down was not the right call.
If we had been playing great defense like 3 years ago, fine, score ASAP. This team, currently, has zero pass rushers.
As far as delaying a TD with no TOs - never, never, never.
I think they listed 59 yards as his career long during the telecast
What if Barkley gets stopped at the 1 and we don't score on 4 tries from there?
You can't turn down the points there. If you're down by 2, maybe you run some clock and win it with a short FG. But, you can't ignore scoring just because there might be too much time left.
First, I know it is different from the SB, That was worse. I didn't say it was the same. I said it "reminded me."
Second, we lost, so yes, we can take a chance and and ignore scoring for one play and still have plenty of time to score and win.
You score when you can score. Suddenly you expect to score and burn clock at the same time because ... ?
Get your fucking facts straight before you start proclaiming things aren't debatable.
Your grammatical errors and complete lack of sense make your post beyond absurd.
But keep it coming. Can't wait for your next opus.
Math challenged?
Panthers get the ball on the 25. They gain 30 yards to put it on the Giants 45. FG is placed 7 yards behind LOS. That makes the FG 62 yards.
So get your freaking facts straight.
You guys are carrying on like it was automatic. In truth, the chances of making that kick were tiny. Gano hit it. Tip your hat and move on.
Jesus Christmas.