My take

[Colts And Orioles]

o


In the game thread, I advocated going for it on 4th and inches when there was only 2:39 left to play in the 4th quarter ...... and I did so BEFORE the fact, not after the Commanders drove down the field scored their game-winning touchdown.

The reason being is that going for it in that situation would have given the Colts 3 chances to win the game ...... as it wound up being, the Colts only wound up with 1 chance to win the game. And again, I stated that I feared that would happen BEFORE the Commanders went on that 95-yard touchdown drive, not after.

The 3 chances that that going for it on 4th and inces with 239 left to play in the 4th quarter are the following ......


1) Get the first down.

2) If you don't get the first down, keep the Commanders out of the end-zone on a 35-yard field.

3) Even if the Commanders had gotten got into the end zone on that short 35-yard field, there is a pretty good chance that the Colts still may have had some time to get into field goal range on offense.


And while it was great that our punter booted a gem which pinned the Commanders on their own 5-yardline, we didn't know that he was going to do that when the decision to not go for it was made ...... more significantly, whether the Commanders started that final drive from their own 5 yard-line or their own 25 yard-line, the decision to punt the ball in that situation wound up bringing to fruition what I had feared what would happen in the first place ...... it only gave the Colts one chance to win the game (our defense keeping the Commanders out of the end-zone), as there wasn't enough time for the Colts' offense to get into field goal range at that point. And yes, teams have gotten into field goal range with less than 30 seconds left on the clock after receiving a kickoff that late in the 4th quarter, but that is very rare. The Cowboys did it on Monday Night Football against the Giants in 2003, the Chiefs did it in their memorable playoff game last year in the divisional round in 2021.


https://www.pro-football-reference.c...0309150nyg.htm


https://www.pro-football-reference.c...2201230kan.htm


Those examples of teams getting into field goal range with so little time left on the clock occurred 18 years apart (2003, and 2021) ...... and I'm pretty certain that it very rarely happened much in between.


o

[bigalbert]

Let’s put this in perspective a bit.
Sam fumbles in scoring territory
JT fumbles in scoring territory
Pittman drops a pass that could have led to a winning field goal
This game wasn’t on the coaches as much as you think


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Colts And Orioles]

Originally Posted by bigalbert

Let’s put this in perspective a bit.

Sam fumbles in scoring territory.

JT fumbles in scoring territory.

Pittman drops a pass that could have led to a winning field goal

This game wasn’t on the coaches as much as you think

o


Oh, I'm not making the claim that Reich's decision not to go for it on 4th down was the sole reason for the loss ....... there is no question that the Colts blew numerous chances to put the game away earlier than that.


1) The normally sure-handed Jonathan Taylor fumbled the ball away while the Colts were deep in Commanders territory.

2) The Colts had the ball on the 1-footline on 3rd down, and failed to punch the ball into the end zone. Instead, they had to settle for a field goal.


Rather, I'm critiquing the decision to punt the ball as one of numerous reasons why the Colts lost the game.


Also ...... if there were 7 or 8 minutes still left to play, I would have punted the ball. I only advocated going for it because of the time that was left on the clock (2:39), and the fact that punting in that situation would likely only give the Colts 1 chance to win the game.


o

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by Colts And Orioles

o

Also ...... if there were 7 or 8 minutes still left to play, I would have punted the ball. I only advocated going for it because of the time that was left on the clock (2:39), and the fact that punting in that situation would likely only give the Colts 1 chance to win the game.


o

Frank said he debated the call. He went with the odds that the defense, who was stout most of the day, would keep them out of the endzone with a long field. I can't see criticizing that call.

I mean, look at what it came down to... Heinicke basically throws a hail-mary type pass from midfield. Gilmore, one the best CB's ever, still gets himself into great position. But then McLaurin makes a fucking unbelievable play going over the top just to get simultaneous possession, and then finishes the unbelievable play by tearing the ball away from Gilmore. What are the odds?

(by the way, none of that matters if we don't fumble twice in the RZ)

But imagine if we turn the ball over right there at our 34 and they still eat the clock and score. The man would be crucified.

[Colts And Orioles]

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

Frank said he debated the call. He went with the odds that the defense, who was stout most of the day, would keep them out of the endzone with a long field. I can't see criticizing that call.

I mean, look at what it came down to... Heinicke basically throws a hail-mary type pass from midfield. Gilmore, one the best CB's ever, still gets himself into great position. But then McLaurin makes a fucking unbelievable play going over the top just to get simultaneous possession, and then finishes the unbelievable play by tearing the ball away from Gilmore. What are the odds?

(by the way, none of that matters if we don't fumble twice in the RZ)

But imagine if we turn the ball over right there at our 34 and they still eat the clock and score. The man would be crucified.

o


If we had turned the ball over on downs there with 2:35 left to play, we still would have had 2 additional chances to win the game.

Also, whether or not one will potentially get crucified for a call should not factor into a coach's tough decisions, such as that one. I was one of the few who agreed with Bill Belichick for going for it on 4th down and 2 against the Colts in their nationally-televised game in 2009. If he had punted the ball, he would have been giving the Colts the ball back with enough time to score the winning touchdown and drain the clock. As it turned out, he gave his team 2 chances to win (going for it and getting the first down, and keeping the Colts out of the end zone on a short field should they fail to get the first down.) And frankly, the Patriots got the first down, but the refs made a bad call on the spot of the ball.


https://www.jt-sw.com/football/boxes...2009-10-ne-ind


Finally, and perhaps most significantly, it was 4th and inches, not 4th and 2, or even 4th down and a full yard. If a team cannot get one foot on 4th down, regardless of where they are in the field, then they have no one to blame but themselves for losing the game. As I said, they would have had 3 chances to win the game had they gone for it ...... and frankly, there is no good reason why they shouldn't/couldn't have capitalized on their very first of those 3 chances by getting a first down on 4th and inches.

o

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by CletusPyle

I love JT, but his fumbles have likely cost us 2 games!

What a shocking development, who could have ever guessed that would happen?

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by Colts And Orioles

o


If we had turned the ball over on downs there with 2:35 left to play, we still would have had 2 additional chances to win the game.

Also, whether or not one will potentially get crucified for a call should not factor into a coach's tough decisions, such as that one. I was one of the few who agreed with Bill Belichick for going for it on 4th down and 2 against the Colts in their nationally-televised game in 2009. If he had punted the ball, he would have been giving the Colts the ball back with enough time to score the winning touchdown and drain the clock. As it turned out, he gave his team 2 chances to win (going for it and getting the first down, and keeping the Colts out of the end zone on a short field should they fail to get the first down.) And frankly, the Patriots got the first down, but the refs made a bad call on the spot of the ball.


https://www.jt-sw.com/football/boxes...2009-10-ne-ind


Finally, and perhaps most significantly, it was 4th and inches, not 4th and 2, or even 4th down and a full yard. If a team cannot get one foot on 4th down, regardless of where they are in the field, then they have no one to blame but themselves for losing the game. As I said, they would have had 3 chances to win the game had they gone for it ...... and frankly, there is no good reason why they shouldn't/couldn't have capitalized on their very first of those 3 chances by getting a first down on 4th and inches.

o

I hear you. For the record, I wouldn't have complained if they went for it. I think it was a toss-up. But since it was a toss-up, I can't complain that they punted.

Of course, this brings to mind what the Eagles have been doing. Lining up in victory formation and pushing the QB.

[rcubed]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

What a shocking development, who could have ever guessed that would happen?

oh shut up.

[rcubed]

Originally Posted by bigalbert

Let’s put this in perspective a bit.
Sam fumbles in scoring territory
JT fumbles in scoring territory
Pittman drops a pass that could have led to a winning field goal
This game wasn’t on the coaches as much as you think


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

add in gilmore's sure interception that the WR took from him.

Sam was basically what I expected. Did some good things, did some not great things.
I think he will go through some growing pains and will be interesting to see how he finishes the year.

[rcubed]

also, I never want to see hines running between the tackles again. they say they want to get him the ball more but dont seem to scheme to his talents. he needs to be out in space as evidenced by some of his receptions and his touchdown run to the outside.