
|
NotoriousEAG
Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/14/2007 6:37 PM
|

|

|

|
When I saw Dirk Johnson trot on the field I was incredulous. After hitting a 4th and 10, the Eagles faced a 4th and 15.
When a season was riding on one play, Reid went with the pussiest move out there. His season was on the line, and he punted. Fucking punted.
When the ball left Johnson's toe I left the bar, knowin full well the Eagles would never see the ball again. Never in my life have I seen such an illogical, gutless move.
Andy Reid = Bitch of the Year
|

|
|

|

|
Seth in 736
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/14/2007 7:23 PM
|

|

|

|
UN
BE
LEAVEMEALONEABLE.
WHAT was his explanation for that 'coaching move'????
TELL ME SOMEONE ASKED HIM IN THE POSTGAME P.C.???
I
Am disgusted.
|

|
|

|

|
NotoriousEAG
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/14/2007 8:36 PM
|

|

|

|
Seth, on the plus side Reid said he "has to do a better job".
|

|
|

|

|
eagleeyebill
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/14/2007 9:41 PM
|

|

|

|
usually i am a big red apologist, i will admit that freely. but even i in this case couldnt believe it. even if they had 3 timeouts instead of 2, i would have still gone for it, because of the way the defense being ripped apart by deuce.
with two timeouts, even if they got off the field in 3, by the time the saints punted, the birds would have had maybe 40 secs. left to go downfield, against a fierce passrush, with no timeouts. while 4th and 15 was go gimme, it was still the best alternative.
while its not what cost them the game,
bad choice andy,
bad choice
|

|
|

|

|
kalbo
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 7:56 AM
|

|

|

|
Does it really matter? We can sit and criticize a punt decision for the next eight months, but in the end we couldn't make a stop on defense. All night long, the Saints kept getting into 2nd and long situations and we let them off the hook (not to quote Denny Green). Anybody watching knew this game was over when the New Orleans punter converted the first down by following our gunner-blocker down the field after the missed block attempt.
They did the same thing to us that the Rams did five years ago...take a dangerous passing offense and just beat on us with the running game to eat the clock and tire out the middle of the defense. Brutal.
Just keep this in mind...we were 5-6 and every single one of us BURIED this team after the Colts loss. I for one am thrilled that the team went on the run they did. It's been fun to watch and it was all a bonus.
|

|
|

|

|
NotoriousEAG
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 8:31 AM
|

|

|

|
Kalbo, whileI agree with your overall sentiment I cannot get the punt out of my head.
He had an oppurtunity, albeit a longshot, and Reid chose to punt his season away. It was there for the taking, and he acted a bitch.
The Tapeh play is also a sore point. Everyone in the league knows the Eagles run play action in that situation, with the typical result being a McNabb touchdown or interception. Why they got cute again is cause for much consternation.
|

|
|

|

|
Dino727
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:09 AM
|

|

|

|
Punting in that situation is a criminal offense. IT was Kotite-esk clock management. Under 2 minutes with only 2 timeouts - at BEST you get the ball back in pretty much the same spot on the field with a minute left and no timeouts.
Yes, 4th and 15 is low percentage. BUT YOU HAVE TO TRY. If you fail, you still need a stop.
Fat man gave up. I'm still pissed.
|

|
|

|

|
Dino727
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:10 AM
|

|

|

|
They needed a score to tie the game. It is MUCH HARDER TO SCORE IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE BALL.
|

|
|

|

|
NotoriousEAG
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:13 AM
|

|

|

|
Dino I don't think you and I have ever agreed this much.
|

|
|

|

|
Dino727
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:17 AM
|

|

|

|
The Saints had been running through them all night. What if the eff made Andy think he could get a 3 and out at that point? Effing retard. Monumental coaching choke.
|

|
|

|

|
Dino727
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:17 AM
|

|

|

|
what IN the eff
|

|
|

|

|
NotoriousEAG
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:23 AM
|

|

|

|
Anybody know how many 3 and outs the Eagles forced all night?
I think only 1, but I could be wrong
|

|
|

|

|
SeeZakRun
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:26 AM
|

|

|

|
Only one, and that was when Payton unfathomably elected to throw three straight times.
|

|
|

|

|
kalbo
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:36 AM
|

|

|

|
EAG and Dino, I'm not defending the punt. I coach a team myself and would NEVER have given the ball back to the defense with under two minutes to play and less than a full complement of timeouts. I'm just saying that we shouldn't lose focus on the real reason for the loss. Andy will be Andy and will have clock management blunders as long as he coaches...you either understand how to manage the clock in pressure situations or you don't. He clearly does not. It's easy to sit on the viewer end of the camera and say what a coach should do. It's completely different to be in the heat of the moment and have to make that call with a game and a season on the line. I don't know how many times I've been there, and certainly never at a level of football that compares to an NFC Division Playoff game with millions watching.
The bottom line is that the inability to get a stop on defense when we needed it is what lost the game. The Eagles had a chance at the end, sure, and all but a few would have gone for it on 4th and 15. It is defensible, but instinct and trust in your team takes over when you only have three seconds to make a decision. His instinct is non-agressive and his trust lies in his defensive side of the ball in that situation. If McNabb is the QB there, he goes with McNabb and tells him to make something happen. No question.
|

|
|

|

|
DirtyGreenBird7
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:44 AM
|

|

|

|
The worst decision in the history of coaching.
There's no explanation. NONE! I cannot believe the media did not ask him about it. Did not anyone hear his "reason?"
This game was so much like the first in many ways. A KILLER defensive penalty in both games that allowed N.O. to win. Last time - 12 men on the field. This time - illegal contact. It would have been about 3rd and 25, instead - automatic first down.
BTW - that is the worst rule in football. How can they justify a 5 yard penalty erasing a 2nd and 25 situation? Terrible. But thems the rules - and Eagles shot themselves in the foot again.
Still, Eagles WRs were open deep all game long and they just had converted a 4th and 10 by gaining about 16. So did Andy just miss that play and forgot that it was certainly possible to convert a 4th and 15?
There's no way he could have believed that after allowing the Saints to gouge them for the first 58:20, that the Eagles would somehow all of the sudden stop them in the last 1:40!!!!
|

|
|

|

|
DirtyGreenBird7
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:44 AM
|

|

|

|
He quit and I hate quitters.
|

|
|

|

|
NovaEagle
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 9:53 AM
|

|

|

|
I don't think the punt was a good decision, but they lost becuase the saints O line dominated the eagles D line to the tune of 200 yards rushing.
Punt or no punt, you don't win playoff games with that kind of defensive effort.
|

|
|

|

|
SeeZakRun
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 10:00 AM
|

|

|

|
There's no explanation. NONE! I cannot believe the media did not ask him about it. Did not anyone hear his "reason?"
He was asked about it at the post-game PC and yesterday as well and gave his reasons.
|

|
|

|

|
Dino727
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 10:07 AM
|

|

|

|
Andy Kotite.
|

|
|

|

|
NotoriousEAG
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 10:36 AM
|

|

|

|
but they lost becuase the saints O line dominated the eagles D line to the tune of 200 yards rushing.
Which makes the decision to punt more indefensible.
|

|
|

|

|
Dean-o
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 10:42 AM
|

|

|

|
The head coach made the decision to put the game on the shoulders of the defense to make a stand and get the ball back. The defense didn't make the stop. The rest is history.
It was the correct call, ... suck it up and move on.
|

|
|

|

|
NovaEagle
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 10:44 AM
|

|

|

|
Putting the blame on that punt is simply looking at the symptom, not the cause.
Punting in that situation is dumb, but the Saints won that game on the ground. If they held the saints to 100 yards rushing--they don't need to go for it on 4th and 15.
|

|
|

|

|
SeeZakRun
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 10:44 AM
|

|

|

|
It was not the correct call. Even if it had worked.
|

|
|

|

|
NotoriousEAG
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 10:50 AM
|

|

|

|
Dean-o, be serious.
The season was on the line and he punted. No one, and I mean NO ONE honestly thought that the Eagles were going to get a stop.
Even if they fail to convert the 4th, they could still bet the ball back with a 3 and out.
|

|
|

|

|
kalbo
RE: Why, Andy, Why?
|

|
Reply
|

|
1/15/2007 10:52 AM
|

|

|

|
For sake of argument, let's play it forward. If the defense makes the stop, the Eagles get the ball back with just under a minute left at thier own 25 and have to go 45-50 yards in that amount of time. Unlikely. If they don't pun't and they don't convert 4th and 15 we have the same result. So the case is made that they should have gone for it. Ok, so let's presume that they go for it and convert. Now they're in FG range and they work the clock for a tie, right? You don't think that Reid goes for the win, do you? So they tie the score and go to OT. We better win that toss to have a prayer at that point. If we lose the toss, it was all for naught because they'd put together yet one more drive consisting of Bush/McAllister to win.
I see how we would have had a chance if we didn't punt, but he was risking one chance against several...a muffed punt, a fumble, a defensive stop. It was the right call in a poker game because it gave him the most number of possible outs, even though I NEVER would have made it there.
|

|
|

|
|
|