Garretts 3rd down call

[diehard2294]

Not throwing the ball late in the 4th on third down and playing for the FG to make it 16-14?? was he scared of a turnover? or was he just that comfortable letting the up and down defense win the game? I felt he showed no confidence in the offense, and therefore had no back bone

thoughts?

 

[cmd34]

We're a tough crowd to please so Garrett can almost do no right.

Still, it was a pussy move. Garrett sucks.

 

[Sheik]

Garrett being Garrett.

Dumb son of a bitch tried to keep the game close enough to lose.

 

[Theebs]

I didn't understand it on the road, but that was a run called to beat a blitz and it didn't.

If he gets loose there it's a Td.

Sooner or later we are going to play a really good game on offense. I hope it's next week.

 

[Hoofbite]

I didn't understand it on the road, but that was a run called to beat a blitz and it didn't.

If he gets loose there it's a Td.

Sooner or later we are going to play a really good game on offense. I hope it's next week.

This reminds me of the John Madden skits where John states the obvious.

"Ya know, if he runs through the goal line that's gonna be a touchdown".

 

[Theebs]

This reminds me of the John Madden skits where John states the obvious.

"Ya know, if he runs through the goal line that's gonna be a touchdown".

Sorry, it's the truth he called it anticipating a blitz.

Next time I will post some generic stupid Garrett shit.

 

[diehard2294]

I just feel he coaches like he is on egg shells...I am glad we won today, but I just feel we are a train wreck waiting to happen.

 

[diehard2294]

Sorry, it's the truth he called it anticipating a blitz.

Next time I will post some generic stupid Garrett shit.

"its a process" stack good days":jerry2

 

[Bonecrusher#31]

Worst call ever....Reminds me of the Pats game last year.

Sorry Bastid got bailed out by bad ref calls and "decent" defense afterwards....

Ginger must go...

 

[Midswat]

Felt like scared coaching. You have two big, physical corners and they're secondary was beat up. I'da thrown it to the endzone and let the recievers try and high point it.

Definitely feel like we're lucky to walk away winners there.

 

[NoDak]

If we had passed there, and turned the ball over people would have shit themselves inside out. It was late in the game, we needed only a FG to take the lead. I am certainly no Garrett fanboy, but he can't win. It was the right call to run and ensure you at least leave yourself a chance to take the lead.

What do you think the reaction would be if we had passed there and Romo throws an INT? Or there's a strip sack? Or even just a sack that knocks us back for a longer FG and then Bailey misses?

 

[diehard2294]

If we had passed there, and turned the ball over people would have shit themselves inside out. It was late in the game, we needed only a FG to take the lead. I am certainly no Garrett fanboy, but he can't win. It was the right call to run and ensure you at least leave yourself a chance to take the lead.

What do you think the reaction would be if we had passed there and Romo throws an INT? Or there's a strip sack? Or even just a sack that knocks us back for a longer FG and then Bailey misses?

thats my point..he was scared of a bad play,so he coaches that way and players will follow

 

[NoDak]

thats my point..he was scared of a bad play,so he coaches that way and players will follow

Anybody with a brain in their head should be scared of a bad play in that situation. From Lombardi, to Landry, to Walsh... In that situation, you absolutely have to come away with points. Going conservative in a situation that calls for it is a good thing. So I ask you this... What would your answer be to the question I posed at the end of that post above?

 

[cmd34]

If we had passed there, and turned the ball over people would have shit themselves inside out. It was late in the game, we needed only a FG to take the lead. I am certainly no Garrett fanboy, but he can't win. It was the right call to run and ensure you at least leave yourself a chance to take the lead.

What do you think the reaction would be if we had passed there and Romo throws an INT? Or there's a strip sack? Or even just a sack that knocks us back for a longer FG and then Bailey misses?

didn't we already have the lead? I mean I get what you're saying, 3 more points means they need a TD to beat us, but a TD there ends the game. With the way our defense has played in meaningful possessions, I would have trusted Romo to get the TD. We win or lose with Romo anyway.

 

[diehard2294]

didn't we already have the lead? I mean I get what you're saying, 3 more points means they need a TD to beat us, but a TD there ends the game. With the way our defense has played in meaningful possessions, I would have trusted Romo to get the TD. We win or lose with Romo anyway.

+1

 

[Theebs]

If we had passed there, and turned the ball over people would have shit themselves inside out. It was late in the game, we needed only a FG to take the lead. I am certainly no Garrett fanboy, but he can't win. It was the right call to run and ensure you at least leave yourself a chance to take the lead.

What do you think the reaction would be if we had passed there and Romo throws an INT? Or there's a strip sack? Or even just a sack that knocks us back for a longer FG and then Bailey misses?

Against Tampa he threw the ball in a similar situation, everyone freaked including me.

Similar situation today so I can't complain, Suprised DEz didn't get a shot though.

 

[NoDak]

didn't we already have the lead? I mean I get what you're saying, 3 more points means they need a TD to beat us, but a TD there ends the game. With the way our defense has played in meaningful possessions, I would have trusted Romo to get the TD. We win or lose with Romo anyway.

No. We were down by 1. Needed the FG to take the lead 16-14. A TD there doesn't end it. We would have went for 2, and if we made it would have had a 7 pt lead.

+1

You +1 that, and it was you that started the thread. Go back and read your very first sentence. You even stated we needed the FG to take the lead.

lol

 

[diehard2294]

No. We were down by 1. Needed the FG to take the lead 16-14. A TD there doesn't end it. We would have went for 2, and if we made it would have had a 7 pt lead.


You +1 that, and it was you that started the thread. Go back and read your very first sentence. You even stated we needed the FG to take the lead.

lol

cheers I didn't read his post thouroughly:towel octoberfest

 

[bbgun]

I don't have a big problem with it. Had we been involved in a shootout with a good team, I'm sure his strategy would have changed.

 

[cmd34]

No. We were down by 1. Needed the FG to take the lead 16-14. A TD there doesn't end it. We would have went for 2, and if we made it would have had a 7 pt lead.


You +1 that, and it was you that started the thread. Go back and read your very first sentence. You even stated we needed the FG to take the lead.

lol

For some reason I thought that was the last FG. So, in that situation, you call a pass play that is either a TD or out of bounds. I know Romo has had some disasters but you have to have faith in him. As coach, I am reminding him.. safe play or throw it away. Even a sack there doesn't hurt since we were so close. I just think you have to believe n your offense, believe in your weapons there. Incompletion or sack there is okay, you still get the field goal. Too much time left to settle for a 1 point lead IMO.