DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Back to the Shurmur conversation

Quote:

---

Ok then let me simplify it for you since I'm trying to spin it and use too many numbers and such..... Pat Shurmur played big time college football, then he spent 9 years coaching big time college football, then he spent 13 years coaching NFL football....

---

Quote:

---

so for you to imply that any old arm chair remote control jockey like yourself has a better grasp of football fundamentals and a better understanding of how to build a game plan to win a football game at this level is beyond laughable. See, I can't even laugh...

---

I'm actually using the sound reasonings of people like John Madden.

Here is a Paul Brown Quote for ya.....

"I decided before that half was over that you had to integrate the running game with an intelligently conceived passing offense to win in pro football," he said later.

_______________________________________

Houston is maybe the most balanced team in the NFL in terms of talent on offense and defense, and coach Gary Kubiak has one of the league’s most balanced offenses as well. He runs a West Coast offense built around the stretch-zone running scheme he learned from Mike Shanahan and offensive line coaching guru Alex Gibbs in Denver. The Texans are tied for No. 3 in the NFL in scoring and are sixth in rushing yards.

http://www.packersnews.com/article/20121...defeated-record

In a confrence call quoting Head Coach John Harbaugh regarding Houstons success.....

Offensively, first of all it starts with the quarterback and he just continues to prove himself as one of the top quarterbacks in the league. They have weapons everywhere. Every one of their skill guys is a weapon. They can all get behind you. They all run routes. They do a great job of mixing things up as far as run, pass, screen and stuff like that.

http://prod.www.texans.clubs.nfl.com/new...78-dd93b384c9eb

I could keep doing that for pages showing how successfull teams that to this point aren't set up to play "pass happy".... You know, with rookies at QB's or mediocre QB's ( Unless you think shaub is in the same league with Drew Bress ), use a balanced attack to be successfull.

But no, go on with your little snide BS like it's me and my idea. Make it sound like I make this crap up and think I know more than shurmer. Of course that's nothing but a crock of BS, but I'll keep calling you on it.



The fact is, I've learned these things from NFL HC's and their beliefs, game plans and success over decades. People that have accomplished far more than Shurmer has. And if he doesn't change his way, ever wiil have.

But you just carry on...... As you were football soldier!

Quote:

---

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/101533-texans-owner-puts-kubiak-on-hot-seat



Views
20180
Comments
28

09:04 AM ET 05.03 | Texans owner Bob McNair raised the bar, saying that after all of the offseason moves geared toward improving the defense, he expects a playoff appearance. McNair also pointed to a favorable start, as Houston opens with three of four games at home. That won't make fourth-year coach Gary Kubiak sleep any easier. One of the Texans' biggest problems has been in AFC South play; Kubiak is 2-10 over the last three years against the Colts and Titans.

Boston Globe

---

Quote:

---

Pit would have fired him after his 4th season when they went from 9-7 back to 6-10.. they would be in the 2nd year of their new rebuilding program right now instead of 6-1 and one the best teams in football.

---

That would depend on how he coached. Does he act stupid and expect Matt Shaub to pass 50 times a game? Nope!

When you see a guy using sound logic and a good game plan, you aren't so quick to pull the trigger. But when you see someone doing the opposite? Why keep wasting time with someone who from the evidence, doesn't have a clue?

No Kubiak is actually my idea HC. He uses a balanced attack, doesn't put all of the game on his QB's shoulders.

See, he understands that Matt Schaub isn't Peyton Manning or Drew Brees. Our HC seems lost to the fact that Weeden isn't and won't be for a while yest, if ever.

Nice BS to try to disuade and convince others you know what I'm thinking though. The little pokes and barbs mean nothing accept that's all you have to offer. Obviously, because I'm using sound football principals and you've got nothing. That's what people do when they're out of real ammunition. You must have learned that tactic from politics.

Quote:

---

Terry Bradshaw was also drafted in 1970 so those five wins came with a rookie QB. He also finished 3rd in the divison in 1970.

---

Quote:

---

Going from 1 win to 5 is easier than going from 3 to 7...

---

Quote:

---

I think you are taking things just a smidgeon too literally...

---

Quote:

---

Thats the neat thing about the NFL, there have been so many seasons, so many coaches, so many players... that I can take pretty much any situation and show you where it worked... or I can show you where it didn't...

---

Oh I agree with you there. I would have never have tried to compare the two myself. That was someone else. I'm simply asking if he was willing to stand by his comparison.

Maybe you should explain this part to damon.

Quote:

---

it took Tom Landry 7 years to get over .500....

---

Quote:

---

Jimmy Johnson went from 1-15 to 11-5 in 2 seasons coming out of college... Sean Payton went 10-6 in his first season then regressed back to 7 and 8 wins the next couple years before taking off in year 4....

---

Quote:

---

Let's do this, you tell me what you want an example of and I'll go find it... Building a winning football team in the NFL is the sum of dozens of different variables, of which the coach is only 1.... an important one to be sure, but he can only control what he can control.

---

Which is entirely my point. The HC mainly controls game day and oversees his staff. In our case, he actually attempts to be the HC and the OC on game day by calling the O plays. While he has mastered neither, he refuses to concentrate on just one.

Otherwise I really like his staff overall. It seems the QB coach is doing a great job with Weeden. The D could use a little more work on their tacking technique....... but I digress.



I'd like to see him turn the playcalling over to Chilly. If he is unwilling to do that, then he himself hired an OC he doesn't have the faith in to do the job of an OC. I would like to see him concentrate his efforts into being a HC by deligating this to Chilly and quit trying to do two things at one time. He hasn't even established himself as a HC yet isn't concentrating solely on his job? That just makes no sense.

And even you, only a few weeks ago questioned some of the decisions he makes and things he does. Now you're his staunchest supporter?

Quote:

---

Hopefully this week he will run the ball 30 times.. then even if we lose by 20, you will like him a little more.

---

Quote:

---

Bradshaw wasn't there in 1969. Weeden wasn't here in 2011, Bradshaw threw for an average of 108 yards a game, 6 TD's, 24 INT and a 30.4 QB rating and a 38.1 Completion percentage. And you say he was 3rd in the division,, well,. maybe he was, but that was one helluva weak division then.

---

Quote:

---

(weeden is, thus far in his rookie year, WAY better than Bradshaw was. 9 TDs, 10 INT's, 70.8 QB rating and a 55.2 completion percentage and Oh yeah, 1912 yards in 8 games.. he's got two wins and 8 games to go) So is Weeden that much better than Bradshaw, or is he being coached better?

---

So you're saying that not only is shurmer being the HC, but also partly being OC by calling all the plays on O, but he's also the QB and coaching Weeden?

The dude must have wear a cape and have superpowers!

I've given him credit for assembling a good staff. But to try to say he's undertaking all of the duties that go with being a HC, partial OC duties and coaching the QB? Do you really even believe that yourself?

And yes, I watched Bradshaw early in his career. It took forever to get that gunslinger head set straight!



So since both coaches had rookies in their second year and we both know Weeden is quite better as a rookie, I've given you the edge here. So that being the case, why shouldn't we expect Shurmer to win four more games in his second year?

See that's the thing here. Weeden is far better than Bradshaw was. People my age already know this. I didn't consider it news....

Quote:

---

You are also forgetting Terry Hanratty who was always in competition with Bradshaw. In fact, there was a time in Pittsburgh that it looked as if Hanratty would take the job from Bradshaw. That never happened. Oh,, NOLL wanted and got Hanratty in the second round of the 1969 draft out of Notre Dame where he was a Heisman candidate. Just an FYI for ya.

---

Quote:

---

What they saw in 1969, 70 and 71 were called called Growing pains. Same thing we are seeing in Cleveland. Young player mistakes, Young coach mistakes, growing together, learning to win etc etc... Just think, had NOLL tossed Bradshaw out (which folks around here would have insisted on) maybe they don't win 4 superbowls, maybe they don't win any. Hanratty went on to a nothing career by the way.

---

Quote:

---

Are you starting to see the similarities yet? NO?

You don't see young coach,, you don't young team, you don't see young player mistakes and you don't see that you can't possibly know what was supposed to happen on any given play so how the heck can you tell me or anyone else who's to blame?

---

I do see it. I also know that you seem to see it but so far have failed to say you expect the same resluts with four more wins in Shurmers second season as you are saying Knoll had. And with a worse QB by your own admission,

Can you see that? You seem to be your own worse enemy here. You keep pointing out how eerily similar these two scenarios are. what a great coach Chuck Noll turned out to be. How Shurmer almost mirrors that but has a MUCH better rookie QB in his second season.

Yet you refuse to say you expect the same results from Shurmer????



They couldn't answer it in Pittsburgh back then either, But Art Rooney decided that it was time to stay with one guy and it worked. and yes, he tried it with other guys but NEVER got them the Talent. so who knows what would have happened.

Shurmur is getting the talent from Heckert.. it's coming along. It's looking much better than at any time since the 80's for the Browns.

Quote:

---

You can try and twist my words any way you wan, but bottom line, These are almost Identical situations. It really IS the BEST COMPARISON

---

I'm not twisting them. You say they're almost identical yet absolutly seem to refuse to hold Shurmer accountable for the same improvement Noll had.

Even when you yourself point out what a better QB Shurmer has than Noll did,

Wow, just WOW!

Quote:

---

I could keep doing that for pages showing how successfull teams that to this point aren't set up to play "pass happy".... You know, with rookies at QB's or mediocre QB's ( Unless you think shaub is in the same league with Drew Bress ), use a balanced attack to be successfull.

---

Quote:

---

It is ironic how you talk about how the game has changed since the days of Chuck Noll with the money involved and how the game is played, then you quote Paul Brown to prove your point. Has the game changed or not?

---

Since Paul Brown invented the WCO, I'd say the game has changed to be far more the way Paul Brown designed an offense, yes. Back when Noll was coaching they didn't even start using much passing until Bradshaw came along.

And I was certainly speaking of it in an economic sense of course. That with teams being worth a billion plus now expecations are higher and patience isn't nearly the option it was many years ago from a business perspective.

But then again you knew the context I was refering to.

Quote:

---

Pit, let me give you some other facts about the Texans balanced attack that you want because you are correct, they are very balanced.... let me explain why... in 2007 and 2008 when they were 8-8, they threw the ball 56% of the time and in 2009 and 10 when they were 9-7 and 6-10, they threw the ball 58% of the time... then in 2011 and 2012 they have thrown the ball 46 and 48% respectively.... when you are losing more, you throw the ball more...

---

Quote:

---

Do you know how much the Texans have trailed this year? Against the Dolphins they trailed 3-0 for about 8 minutes before taking a 24-3 halftime lead... Against Denver they trailed 2-0 then 5-0 for a total of about 7 minutes... Against the Ravens they trailed by 3 for about 10 minutes... in every game they have won, they have not trailed in the second half..... in three games they never trailed at all... against the Packers they trailed the whole game, in that game they threw the ball 58% of the time....

---

Quote:

---

The Giants won the super bowl last year throwing the ball 59% of the time...

---

Quote:

---

Last year we threw the ball 58% of the time, this year we are at 63%.. is it high? Yea, i guess it's a little higher than I'd like it.. but then in the game where we had the lead, we ran more. That's not a big shocker.

---

Quote:

---

See, I think you have the cause and effect backwards... you think that if you run more, you win more... I think that if you are winning more, you are able to run more... and the stats back that up. Go back and look up Chuck Noll.. the more they won, the more they were able to run... the stats are much lower because of the times they played in.. but the correlation is the same.

---

Quote:

---

As I said, I think we have abandoned the run a little too soon.. but our running game hasn't been nearly as effective you think it has and we haven't abandoned the run nearly as quickly as you think we have...

---

I have already shown that we gave up on the run in the first cincy game when we were down by 6 or less through 3 quarters, we were passing at a 2 to 1 ratio. That's pretty quick with no just cause.

Now let's look at how people handle rookie QB's. For some reason you insist on comparing them to veterans but in most cases, NFL HC's don't. This is why I don't pull a Damon and try to use one singular coach. That doesn't give you much of a true sample....

And under your premise it's not just the financial end of the game that's changed leading to faster expectations, but the game itself. So let's bring things up to date and look at this years crop of rookies and see just how their coaches distribute the plays.......

Colts.... 288 pass attempts.....192 rushing attempts

With what many have called the most prototypical, NFL ready QB to come out in the draft in years, the Colts pass 60% of the time. That's still less than we do.

Dolphins..... 222 attempts......220 rushing attempts

Tannehill has been asked to throw for almost exactly 50% of the time.

Seahawks...... 129 pass attempts..... 246 rushing attempts

Russel wilson has been asked to pass roughly 35% of the time.

Washington....... 233 pass attempts.... 250 rushing attempts

Now with RG3 I must admit the numbers will be somewhat scewed. He does have options to pass or run on some plays if not most. But even at that, there's no way he is expected to pass nearly as much as weeden is because the game plan was admittidly set up to suit his skill set and abilities. Which means many of their plays are designed runs for him. As it stands, he's passed for around 38% of their O plays.

All of these teams have higher rushing averages than we do.

Where our difference will be here I would expect, is I say if you keep rushing the ball with enough attempts, you will eventually wear down the oposing D and it gives you more oppertunities to break runs.

I expect you will say they keep running more because they're better at it.

My contention is we aren't great at either the pass or the run. My contention is, with the acception of Luck who most everyone agreed was the most NFL ready QB in years coming out of the draft, no coach in their right mind would expect a QB coming out of college from the spread O to start throwing at the percentage rate of aaron Rogers or Drew Brees.

No I don't think we have a great running game. nor do we have a great passing game. That's why you mix it up. When we last played the Bengals, we only averaged 3.2 yards per carry. Yet in the first game against them we gave up on the run early down only by six. That's not the way things should work.

It defies logic. We've watched these other QB's play. russel Wilson doesn't look as good as Weeden. Tannehill I would say is about the same. Yet by not asking too much from their QB's as rookies in the league and by rushing more, both of their respective teams have better records than we do.

Maybe if we had run more in the first game against the Bengals and done the same against the Colts, our record would look like theirs. Like you said, you think we gave up on the run too soon and throwing for 63% is...... well, I think quite a bit more than "a little high".

Most people find it amazing that our OL can pass block so well but have trouble run blocking. Joe Thomas was asked why he thought that was. He said it's because they pass block so much more.

I wonder if the same would hold true if we actually stuck with the run and ran it more?

Quote:

---

I'm saying what I'm saying. take it any freakin way you want to..

---

What you are saying is quite obvious. You say their situations mirror each other yet refuse to hold Shurmer to the same standard as Noll.

I get it.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I'm saying what I'm saying. take it any freakin way you want to..

---

What you are saying is quite obvious. You say their situations mirror each other yet refuse to hold Shurmer to the same standard as Noll.

I get it.

---

Quote:

---

Since Paul Brown invented the WCO, I'd say the game has changed to be far more the way Paul Brown designed an offense, yes. Back when Noll was coaching they didn't even start using much passing until Bradshaw came along.

---

Quote:

---

When you are behind late in a game trailing by more than one score, you pass more and run very little. That's not an issue here.

---

Quote:

---

I have shown and you have read, where I pointed out that when leading and only behind by six points, we have passed far more than we have ran. I broke it down and posted the numbers.

---

Quote:

---

You mention the Texans throwing for 58% of the time in 2009 and 2010. Matt Schaub was drafted in 2004. Yet you try to justify throwing in a raw rookie throwing 63% of the time?

---

Quote:

---

No, they aren't Eli Manning or Matt Shaub. As your players grow, develop and your time gets experience and gains an identity, you can switch up and go a little higher with your passing percentages.

---

Quote:

---

Why do you consider it valid to try to compare what we are doing with a field full of rookies with teams that have proven veteran QB's? There really areno comparisons there.

---

Quote:

---

It defies logic. We've watched these other QB's play. russel Wilson doesn't look as good as Weeden. Tannehill I would say is about the same. Yet by not asking too much from their QB's as rookies in the league and by rushing more, both of their respective teams have better records than we do.

---

Quote:

---

JC.


Haslam is a buisness man, and while he may have bought a business, and most will make some changes, usually in upper management, that usually will not filter down too far, as any real business man knows it's the worker bee's that get it all done.

I believe Haslam will give serious thought and get many opinions and reviews before he just dumps Shurmur. Haslma is no idiot, and I doubt HE makes that decision, he may way in, but I highly doubt he made that decision on that one play sufddenly. I bet Haslam can look back at his career and see many more obvious gaffs in his resume to know one mistake doesn't make a loser.

Haslam will do his homework, he will talk to people in the know, he willget opinions from many folks, and he will talk to Shurmur. He will do all this before he even thinks about his next move.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

JC.


Haslam is a buisness man, and while he may have bought a business, and most will make some changes, usually in upper management, that usually will not filter down too far, as any real business man knows it's the worker bee's that get it all done.

I believe Haslam will give serious thought and get many opinions and reviews before he just dumps Shurmur. Haslma is no idiot, and I doubt HE makes that decision, he may way in, but I highly doubt he made that decision on that one play sufddenly. I bet Haslam can look back at his career and see many more obvious gaffs in his resume to know one mistake doesn't make a loser.

Haslam will do his homework, he will talk to people in the know, he willget opinions from many folks, and he will talk to Shurmur. He will do all this before he even thinks about his next move.

---

Yeah, I understand that FF. I was responding to someone that said something about the look on Haslams face when Shumur didn't go for it on 4th and short in the Indy game said it all. well, I ain't buying that. Because the following week, Shurmur went for it on 4th and Short, and we won. So if Haslam is going to look at one play, which one is he going to look at, the one he didn't like, or the one he did?

I just don't believe it will ever come down to just one play.

---

Sorry Daman, I wasn't responding directly to you, figure you missed the "JC" (just Clicking).

Quote:

---

Paul Brown never ever really came close to throwing the ball even 50% of the time. In fact most years it was closer to 30% passing plays. Paul Brown may be credit with the invention of the WCO.. but that's like driving a Cadillac now and giving Henry Ford credit for inventing it.

---

Quote:

---

Evidently it is because we are always behind and the Texans are always ahead and you seem to wonder why they run the ball more than we do.

---

Quote:

---

And I have already admitted that Shurmur may panic a bit and abandon the run too soon... but I think that is something he will work through.

---

Quote:

---

In a different post you made a point of mentioning that Matt Schaub is absolutely not in the class with Brees, etc.. and used the Texans running as a way that Kubiak protects their QB... now that the stats are not in your favor, suddenly Schaub is a veteran who can be trusted to wing it all over the field.. either Schaub is capable of throwing it nearly 60% of the time or he's not.. .because he's done both under Kubiak... and for the record, when Schaub was out, Sage Rosenfels was throwing it all over the field a few years ago too.

---

Funny thing you mention Rosenfels.



In 2006 in four appearances, rosenfels completed 69.2% of his passes. In 07 it was 64.2% and in 08 it was 66.7%.

And no, I didn't intend to put him in the class with Brees with only one acception. Both had been within their respective systems long enough to fully know them, understand them and have experience in them. Both were seasoned veterans who wouldn't make rookie mistakes.

In all the cases I have shown, we are looking at rookie QB's with no experience going into this year. A totally apples to oranges scenario.

Schaub was entering his 4th year in the NFL when he first went to the Texans and has never thrown for less than 61% over the course of a season since he's been there. Does he have the arm of a Drew Brees? No he doesn't. Can you trust him to throw the ball around? Yes you can.

Quote:

---

So Schaub is in the class of Eli but not in the class of Brees.. I didn't realize Brees was that much better than Eli.

---

Quote:

---

I dunno.. maybe for the same reason that you think we should use our rookie running back and oft injured sidekick to do what the Texans are doing with their 4th year back who has had 1200 and 1600 yard seasons the last couple years and their veteran offensive line that has been operating in the same system together for years......... is it possible we are both expecting this team to do something that it just isn't capable of doing yet?

---

Quote:

---

You lament the fact that people use a singular example then throw things like this up as if the run/pass ratio is the difference in why some teams win and others don't. The Seahawks have the 3rd best points against defense in the NFL.. they don't have to throw the ball to win a few games. As for the Dolphins.. maybe if we got to play the Raiders, the Jets twice, the Rams we'd have more wins too.

---

Quote:

---

So after a year and a half you admit he hasn't caught on to when you do and don't keep a balanced running attack?

---

Quote:

---

I think Shurmer is. Both are innexperienced as you have said yet you somehow seem to think it makes sense that one deminsion takes on over 60% of the load?

---

Quote:

---

No, I agree with you. Neither our passing game or running game is complete. Both are young and a work in progress. Which is why you split the load a little more.

---

Quote:

---

We played the Bengals twice. Once we came out of the gate with a balanced attack and stuck with it. Once we totaly abandoned the run while we were still very much in the thick of the game. One we won and one we lost.

---

In both games our offense scored 27 points.. in the game we won our defense gave up 24 and also scored a TD for us.. in the game we lost they gave up 34... but yea, I suppose that whole run/pass ratio thing is the entire reason we won one and lost one.

And I have shown you how we did not abandon the run in the Bengals game until the very end... but I will show you again...

In the first half even down the whole time, we had 15 rushing attempts and 15 passing attempts..

After the half we went down by 14 points before we touched the ball.. our first drive after that was 3 incomplete passes...

We got the ball back mid 3rd quarter, down by 2 touchdowns, and our play selection was..
run for 3 yards
run for 6 yards
pass for 10 yards
run for 2 yards
run for 0 yards (penalty on us)
pass inc.
pass for 9 yards
punt
For those keeping score, thats 4 runs and 3 passes with 2 of the passes coming after a penalty created 2nd and 18...

Next possession, still down by 14 we get the ball near midfield
run for 9 yards
run for 3 yards
pass inc
pass for 18 yards
pass for 23 yards TD

Another drive of 2 runs and 3 passes.. the TD pass was a screen pass, which is very much like a run and used frequently to protect young QBs...


Down by 14 again when we get the ball back 10 something minutes to go in the 4th.. that is when we started throwing the ball a lot.. down by 14 in the 4th quarter...

We are 5 minutes into the 4th quarter and we are now down by 2 touchdowns, we have trailed the entire game, and we had 25 passes and 21 runs.. that's 54%.. isn't that about what you want?

The next drive I won't do play by play but we ran twice and threw 6 times.. and Shurmur is such an idiot for putting that on his rookie QB that all his rookie QB did was throw a 24 yard TD pass to get us back to within 7 with about 7 minutes to play... shame on him.

Our defense then gave up a 5 minute 60 yard FG drive that put them back up by 2 scores with 2 minutes to play.. then we threw the ball 8 consecutive times and kicked a FG and failed to cover the onside kick.

Pit, we did not abandon the run in the first Bengals game until there was 10 minutes to go in the game and we were down by two touchdowns and even then.. IT WORKED as well as it could have... there was no sense in continuing to run the ball.

Our offense in the first Bengals game had the exact same production as the second game.. unfortunately our defense did not. Let me put it this way...

Up to about the 11 minute to go mark in the game.... in game 1, we had 25 passes and 21 runs.. we had scored 17 points and were down by 14... After that we ran twice and threw 12 times, scoring a TD and a FG.. but because of our defense were never in a position where we had the ball down only 1 score.. in game 2, at the 11 minute mark we had 25 passes and 25 runs, had scored 20 points.. BUT.. we were up by 3 in we scored a TD, got a defensive TD.. we threw 4 times and ran 9 times... our last 2 drives to try to ice the game were 3 runs and a punt... See the difference? See how each game played out? Shurmurs play calling or unbalance between pass and run is completely understandable and is in no way the biggest reason why one was a W and the other a L..

But thank you for giving me a reason to look this up, it has caused me to like Shurmur just a little bit more and understand why he is doing what he is doing...

Quote:

---

Unfazed by criticism...does his thing and seems uninfluenced by outsider perspective...thats an important thing for coaches...while the media may hate it...who cares

---

After being ripped apart for not going for it on 4th and 1 on the Colts 40 at the end of the game, he turned around and went for it on 4th and 2 from our own 20 with 4 minutes left in the game and 2 timeouts.

Nah...Shurmur doesn't hear the criticism.

Shurmur and Co. have made more in-game mistakes this week against the Rats.

There just isn't any upside to keeping him. He's proven that he isn't the right guy for this job. There's no way in Hell Shurmur keeps his job for next year. I suppose if he manages to run the table, but...yeah...that's gonna happen...

Quote:

---

We have a Holmgren-officially-gone thread....

Might as well change this to Shurmur-officially-gone....

---

Quote:

---

But , but , What about consistency ??

---

We have that. We consistently suck.

Oh...you mean continuity...yeah...screw that if it means keeping bums.

Quote:

---

Going for it on 4th and 2 from our own 20 with 4 minutes left and 2 timeouts trailing by 7 was the right decision?

I wholly disagree man.

The book says you punt, especially since their offense wasn't having a great day. If you don't convert, they are already in field-goal range, and in today's NFL, kickers make kicks at a rate never seen before in the history of the game.

No, most will say that was the wrong decision. You punt the ball and ask your defense to get a stop. If that happens you get the ball back with 2-3 minutes left to try and get down the field.

---

Quote:

---

Going for it on 4th and 2 from our own 20 with 4 minutes left and 2 timeouts trailing by 7 was the right decision?

I wholly disagree man.

The book says you punt, especially since their offense wasn't having a great day. If you don't convert, they are already in field-goal range, and in today's NFL, kickers make kicks at a rate never seen before in the history of the game.

No, most will say that was the wrong decision. You punt the ball and ask your defense to get a stop. If that happens you get the ball back with 2-3 minutes left to try and get down the field.

---

The book definitely says that you punt. I just happen to disagree with the book there

It was actually from the 28 yard line, but it really doesn't matter much whether it was from the 20, 28, or 40 for that matter. It's pretty safe to say that if you go for it and don't convert, your win probability is very low.

But here's the thing, that is a roughly 50% chance at a conversion, and your chances of scoring a TD with that amount of time in (mostly) 4 down territory really isn't that bad. Punt and your chances of scoring the TD to tie are still pretty bad.

Here's a pretty good model for the situation... http://www.footballcommentary.com/tables/goforit2nd40.txt

Down 7 with 3 minutes left in the game, from your own 40 yard line you need to convert 23% of the time to go for it. Adjusting that there was closer to 4 minutes left in the game, and that it was from slightly deeper in our own territory (easier FG on turnover on downs etc) and I would estimate you should go for it if you have >35% chance of conversion.

Quote:

---

Speaking of time outs, imagine if we would have had an extra time out st the end of the 1st half. We might have had a shot at the end zone from the 11. That's no certainty, but we would have, at least, had a shot.

---

Quote:

---

When he went for it on 4th down on our 20 something today . . . that today screamed "my job is in jeopardy!" There is no other rationale, and I thought of many that said that was a good idea at that juncture.

---

Quote:

---

In 2 of our last 4 games, we have been down 14-0 after our 1st 2 possessions.

---

Which 2 games were those?

I'm really torn between Shurmur or Weeden or both... I'm not sure what bugs me the most, the fact that Shurmur throws the ball on every single 3rd and 1 or 2... or that Weeden throws a bunch of them down the field instead of just getting the first down.... We had a number of 3rd and 4 or 5 where we threw for 2 yards, then on 3rd and 1, we throw it down the field...

Congrats to the defense for adjusting and ending up looking pretty good... it was so Cleveland Browns though that we force punt after punt after punt until we take the lead, then we let them march right down the field... I didn't expect us to shut them out forever but damn, as soon as we got the lead we laid down on defense.

In the end, you can't trade FGs for touchdowns and that's what we tried to do all day...

The playcalling baffles me... and so does some of the execution...

Quote:

---

The problem is our offensive coordinator is a failed head coach. Our defensive coordinator is a failed head coach. Both had the same problems as head coaches that Shurmur does now. Might as well keep Shurmur around and then clean it out after the season.

---