2013-2014 NFL Thread

[Kyyle23]

Having him and Brandon Marshall on the same team is just ridiculous. If they had one good, fast receiver, this WR group would be unstoppable.

 

I think that may end up being Marques Wilson. Brandon Marshall was talking him up a few weeks ago

[iamshack]

Throw a quick slant, run a bootleg so he can dump it out of bounds, anything. Robbie Gould is a fantastic kicker, but 47 yards is never a given. You shouldn't have so little confidence in your offense, especially when they've put up damn near 500 yards.

I agree...the reason we have gone backwards in those situations in the past is because of the conservative nature of the calls in the past. We've tried to run between the tackles there and haven't been successful. However, call a play that isn't so vanilla but yet isn't quite a gimmick play. As you say, call a rollout for Josh, or run a flip 90, or any number of plays where you're not doing what the defense expects, but at the same time, there isn't a high degree of difficulty in executing the play.

 

This goes to what Duke and Jake said previously. I don't have as much of a problem with the 4th and 1 decisions to go for it in the past, I just haven't really cared for the play calling in those situations.

 

I still really like what Trestman is doing; I just hope he is taking some notes and learning this year.

[Kyyle23]

I agree...the reason we have gone backwards in those situations in the past is because of the conservative nature of the calls in the past. We've tried to run between the tackles there and haven't been successful. However, call a play that isn't so vanilla but yet isn't quite a gimmick play. As you say, call a rollout for Josh, or run a flip 90, or any number of plays where you're not doing what the defense expects, but at the same time, there isn't a high degree of difficulty in executing the play.

 

This goes to what Duke and Jake said previously. I don't have as much of a problem with the 4th and 1 decisions to go for it in the past, I just haven't really cared for the play calling in those situations.

 

I still really like what Trestman is doing; I just hope he is taking some notes and learning this year.

 

I think he is for sure. He seems to be intelligent and confident, but not afraid to correct a mistake. Lovie was intelligent and confident, but too stubborn to acknowledge that mistake and correct it.

 

To say he is conservative is just wrong though(not saying you are saying that, shack). Hell, most of the time we have b****ed about his decisions this season is when he is going for it on 4th down. The offense is tremendously aggressive, there is just a few issues(short yardage situations) that need to be fixed. The passing offense is a thing of beauty though.

[Harry Chappas]

I was thinking the same thing. The defense knows 100% you are going to run, and your O-line is not the best at run blocking. There is a good chance the FG becomes longer on 3rd down.

 

What I still don't understand is why the refs picked up the late hit flag on Jared Allen on the opening OT drive. The hit was clearly after the whistle.

 

I would agree except the Bears ran every play in that series I believe and moved the ball rather easily.

 

A 49 yard field goal is never a gimme and a dumb call on 2nd down. You pass the ball on second down, something safe, and 3rd down and then if need be kick it on 4th down.

 

The Bears game plan changed when they went 20-10 and got very conservative. The 2nd and 1 call was terrible at the end of the game.

[Dick Allen]

I don't think sending them out for a 47 yard fg attempt indoors with the 2nd most accurate kicker in NFL history doing the kicking is really that crazy even if it was 2nd down. They probably line up for a kick on 3rd down anyway in case of some sort of screw up, so the 2nd down play is probably going to be a very conservative call and a yard or 2 in perfect weather conditions at that distance doesn't make much of a difference.

[GoSox05]

It depends on who they draft, but the Rams have a chance to be loaded. They currently hold the 2nd overall pick and like the 11th or 12th pick.

 

They could very well have Clowney and Quinn as their DE. That could be a problem.

[witesoxfan]

It depends on who they draft, but the Rams have a chance to be loaded. They currently hold the 2nd overall pick and like the 11th or 12th pick.

 

They could very well have Clowney and Quinn as their DE. That could be a problem.

 

They need a QB. Bradford is perfectly average and Clemens has been a career backup for a reason.

[LittleHurt05]

From 30-39 yards, Gould has made 90.5% of his career field goal tries.

 

From 40-49 yards, Gould has made 72.2 % of his career field goal tries.

 

That is a very significant difference and settling for such a long field goal on 2nd down was an awful decision.

[iamshack]

From 30-39 yards, Gould has made 90.5% of his career field goal tries.

 

From 40-49 yards, Gould has made 72.2 % of his career field goal tries.

 

That is a very significant difference and settling for such a long field goal on 2nd down was an awful decision.

Ugh, that is worse than I would have guessed.

[Dick Allen]

From 30-39 yards, Gould has made 90.5% of his career field goal tries.

 

From 40-49 yards, Gould has made 72.2 % of his career field goal tries.

 

That is a very significant difference and settling for such a long field goal on 2nd down was an awful decision.

If it were outside with some wind, I would agree with you. But in a dome, it was just a bad kick. I guess you could figure Gould's entire day and guess he had to be close to out of gas, but again, teams usually kick it on 3rd down when they have a fairly straight forward FG in OT to win, so really you were looking at the next play to pick up significant yardage and the call would probably have been conservative. Plus, the amount of penalties the Bears have been racking up comes into play.

[GoSox05]

They need a QB. Bradford is perfectly average and Clemens has been a career backup for a reason.

 

 

They are in a tough spot with Bradford. I would draft another QB in the first round.

[iamshack]

If it were outside with some wind, I would agree with you. But in a dome, it was just a bad kick. I guess you could figure Gould's entire day and guess he had to be close to out of gas, but again, teams usually kick it on 3rd down when they have a fairly straight forward FG in OT to win, so really you were looking at the next play to pick up significant yardage and the call would probably have been conservative. Plus, the amount of penalties the Bears have been racking up comes into play.

But they don't kick it on 2nd down. And we weren't in this position because of one long play. There was a sequence of plays where we were just running it down their throats. Why stop there?

 

I agree, Gould makes that kick many more times than not, and if he just executes there, this is a footnote...but you have to know as a coach that if he does miss it there, you are the guy having to answer for these questionable decisions.

[Dick Allen]

The only 2 FG attempts Robbie Gould has missed in Minnesota during his ENTIRE career, occurred yesterday, and one was a 66 yd attempt that was right on line.

 

Looking back, kicking on 2nd down seems odd, but where is the guarantee they would have picked up yards. Didn't the Bears have 2nd and 1 late in regulation, where a first down would have probably iced it and they failed?

 

 

I actually like Lovie a lot better than most. But I can't fault Trestman for kicking. I think most of us were shocked when it went wide.

Edited December 2, 2013 by Dick Allen

[witesoxfan]

They are in a tough spot with Bradford. I would draft another QB in the first round.

 

I would cut him if I were St. Louis. I said he was perfectly average but I think he still has room to grow and he could be a great fit on a lot of teams who miss on their QB this year or want a little competition (just off the top of my head here, but teams who might need a QB other than STL - NYJ, CLE, HOU, TEN, JAC, OAK, MIN, CHI, TB, ARI). Houston seems like it could be a good fit for him, and frankly Chicago does too. Bradford could be a mini-Brees, if you will, but if you bring in Hundley or Mariota or Bridgewater (whoever is there at 2) and draft them, and then Bradford comes out next year and puts up a 350/550 (63.6%), 4250 YDS, 35 TD, 10 INT season, good for a 100.9 QB rating. I'm pretty sure he's a FA after next season, so do you franchise him at $20 mill a year and handicap your cap situation, or let him go and have to hope the rookie QB simply follows him in that situation, or do you take the cap hit on the rookie, trade him for a 1st or 2nd, and re-sign Bradford? Frankly, in that situation, I think you would have to let him go.

 

Ultimately, that leads to this: why not just cut him in the first place to prevent that, even if Bradford could be an absolute stud for you next season? Maybe you can get a 5th or 7th for him or something along those lines, but I don't see any way the Rams can keep him at this point.

[iamshack]

The only 2 FG attempts Robbie Gould has missed in Minnesota during his ENTIRE career, occurred yesterday, and one was a 66 yd attempt that was right on line.

 

Looking back, kicking on 2nd down seems odd, but where is the guarantee they would have picked up yards. Didn't the Bears have 2nd and 1 late in regulation, where a first down would have probably iced it and they failed?

 

 

I actually like Lovie a lot better than most. But I can't fault Trestman for kicking. I think most of us were shocked when it went wide.

Yes, they had a 2 and 1 and a 3rd and 1, ran two times between the tackles, which the defense was expecting, and it didn't work.

 

I guess what we're saying is that there are other plays that can be called which aren't necessarily risky plays, but aren't so vanilla that you can just throw 9 people in the box and shut them down, either. We as a team, and Forte in particular, are very good at running outside. We also have two huge receivers that are willing and able to go over the middle on quick slants, and also are good at preventing dbs from getting position on said slant plays, and are also good at batting balls down.

 

Yes, he probably makes that kick 8 or 9 times out of 10, but this is the time he missed, and that's why you don't make that decision there.

[chw42]

Alshon has around 150 more yards than Marshall now on the season. Who would have thought that'd be possible heading into the season?

[iamshack]

Alshon has around 150 more yards than Marshall now on the season. Who would have thought that'd be possible heading into the season?

More interestingly to me, I wonder how much of that is a result of Marshall being the primary target of defenses, or Alshon just being a f***ing beast? Probably a little bit of both, but more of the latter than most folks realize...

[Dick Allen]

Yes, they had a 2 and 1 and a 3rd and 1, ran two times between the tackles, which the defense was expecting, and it didn't work.

 

I guess what we're saying is that there are other plays that can be called which aren't necessarily risky plays, but aren't so vanilla that you can just throw 9 people in the box and shut them down, either. We as a team, and Forte in particular, are very good at running outside. We also have two huge receivers that are willing and able to go over the middle on quick slants, and also are good at preventing dbs from getting position on said slant plays, and are also good at batting balls down.

 

Yes, he probably makes that kick 8 or 9 times out of 10, but this is the time he missed, and that's why you don't make that decision there.

If you really think you and others on here know obvious plays that will no doubt work for yardage and Trestman doesn't, it's time for the Fire Trestman thread. Without a doubt if he called for one of these so called slants and the pass was tipped and picked off, the experts who now say that would have worked would have been saying, "they were in obvious FG range, why are they taking any chances?

 

It's Monday morning. If whatever he called worked, he is a genius. If it didn't, it was foolish.

Edited December 2, 2013 by Dick Allen

[iamshack]

If you really think you and others on here know obvious plays that will no doubt work for yardage and Trestman doesn't, it's time for the Fire Trestman thread. Without a doubt if he called for one of these so called slants and the pass was tipped and picked off, the experts who now say that would have worked would have been saying, "they were in obvious FG range, why are they taking any chances?

Well, as for the play selection, everyone watches everyone else's film, and implements eachother's situational plays in the NFL. It's not like cracking some top-secret code or something where I or someone else knows things or doesn't know things that Trestman does or does not. It's more about a philosophy that he has that has not worked particularly well that I disagree with. Trestman has made decisions I and most others would agree with in terms of when to go for it and when not to, but his play calling in many of those situations has been conservative. He makes the aggressive decision to go for it instead of kicking, but then he calls a traditional short-yardage play that NFL defenses have become very adept at stopping. In my humble opinion (and I get it, I am no coach, but based on what coaches like Andy Reid and Bill Belichick and John Fox are doing), it seems to help if you run something that is still a safe play but is not so easily stopped by a defense stacking the box to stop an inside running play.

 

As for the second guessing because of a turnover there, I think there would definitely be people grumbling, as there always will be when things don't work out, but people would be grumbling about the execution of that play more so than not kicking a field goal there. From 47 yards, no. From 37 yards, quite possibly.

[LittleHurt05]

If you really think you and others on here know obvious plays that will no doubt work for yardage and Trestman doesn't, it's time for the Fire Trestman thread. Without a doubt if he called for one of these so called slants and the pass was tipped and picked off, the experts who now say that would have worked would have been saying, "they were in obvious FG range, why are they taking any chances?

 

It's Monday morning. If whatever he called worked, he is a genius. If it didn't, it was foolish.

 

 

I disagree. Had Gould made the kick, it still would have been a foolish decision that worked. The detractors didn't just come out after the kick in hindisght, as the FG unit was coming on the field, tons of national writers on Twitter were wondering what the hell Trestman was doing. It was pretty obvious that it wasn't the smartest decision.

[witesoxfan]

If you really think you and others on here know obvious plays that will no doubt work for yardage and Trestman doesn't, it's time for the Fire Trestman thread. Without a doubt if he called for one of these so called slants and the pass was tipped and picked off, the experts who now say that would have worked would have been saying, "they were in obvious FG range, why are they taking any chances?

 

It's Monday morning. If whatever he called worked, he is a genius. If it didn't, it was foolish.

 

I really hate this type of mentality. Shack and others are saying "this is what I would have done." It's perfectly within a fan's right to question his team's decisions. It doesn't make them qualified for the position or mean that they know more about the situation. It just means that, given this set of variables, I would have attempted to get closer to make it an easier field goal.

[GoSox05]

I would cut him if I were St. Louis. I said he was perfectly average but I think he still has room to grow and he could be a great fit on a lot of teams who miss on their QB this year or want a little competition (just off the top of my head here, but teams who might need a QB other than STL - NYJ, CLE, HOU, TEN, JAC, OAK, MIN, CHI, TB, ARI). Houston seems like it could be a good fit for him, and frankly Chicago does too. Bradford could be a mini-Brees, if you will, but if you bring in Hundley or Mariota or Bridgewater (whoever is there at 2) and draft them, and then Bradford comes out next year and puts up a 350/550 (63.6%), 4250 YDS, 35 TD, 10 INT season, good for a 100.9 QB rating. I'm pretty sure he's a FA after next season, so do you franchise him at $20 mill a year and handicap your cap situation, or let him go and have to hope the rookie QB simply follows him in that situation, or do you take the cap hit on the rookie, trade him for a 1st or 2nd, and re-sign Bradford? Frankly, in that situation, I think you would have to let him go.

 

Ultimately, that leads to this: why not just cut him in the first place to prevent that, even if Bradford could be an absolute stud for you next season? Maybe you can get a 5th or 7th for him or something along those lines, but I don't see any way the Rams can keep him at this point.

 

Whatever they end up doing, I hope they mess it up. The Rams with a good QB would be a real headache to the rest of the NFC.

[witesoxfan]

Whatever they end up doing, I hope they mess it up. The Rams with a good QB would be a real headache to the rest of the NFC.

The Cardinals need to improve their running game, but they're a legitimate threat in the NFC right now too. The NFC in general went from punks to studs in a matter of 2 years.

[LittleHurt05]

Whatever they end up doing, I hope they mess it up. The Rams with a good QB would be a real headache to the rest of the NFC.

 

They are in QB hell right now. They have so much invested in Bradford, it's hard to just dump him, especially after the injury. But he hasn't shown to be a franchise QB yet.

[witesoxfan]

They are in QB hell right now. They have so much invested in Bradford, it's hard to just dump him, especially after the injury. But he hasn't shown to be a franchise QB yet.

 

He does have 2 years left after this past year. Frankly though, as I said above, I think you have to make the decision as to whether or not you believe he is the QB of the future. If not, you cut him and move on.