you will not find anyone who is against the onside kick in the game, thats because it worked!! people are upset about the int on 4th down, because it didn't work!! I am just happy that the CS is calling the games to win and putting the players in positions to win the games as opposed to not losing the game.
Seems like we're beating a dead horse with this one already, but I am in agreement with what J2004 said. I thought the on-side kick was a brilliant call. They saw something on film, called it at the perfect time, and caught everybody napping. If it didn't work, I wouldn't have complained about it, rather would have applauded the coaching staff for their aggressiveness and preparedness. On the flip side I thought going for the TD was wrong. Said it at the time and still believe it. It was the third quarter, the score was tied (and one of their TDs came on a very short field), we were holding them well so far, you take the points and let the chips fall where they may. Instead he left points on the field and sent a message to his up until then successful defense that he doesn't believe they could stop Manning. To compound the problem, they ran the same play three times in a row on 1-3 down, then took a TO, and came back with a play action that the whole stadium knew was coming. I'm not going to kill Mangini for the call because I could undertand his reasoning, just don't agree with it....
Whether you agree or disagree ,the message Mangini is sending to his players is simple but more powerful than any play call..I believe in you..I believe in your ability to execute and make big plays..I bet every one of those Jet players support that choice and appreciates EM for it...I think the biggest obstacle in coaching in the NFL or any other professional sports is getting to buy into your system..if they do, the chances of success increase twofold..mangini is accomplishing this in very quick fashion it appears to me.
Very true. Its the circle of life simba...lol. Maybe its me...but Im really upset about that onside kick...that was very risky for our hardworking boys...I lost a lot sleep Sunday night that our coaching staff would put our boys through that. What if it didnt work. As far as the fourth down call...let me go on record stating that it was a great great call. Dearth had a lot of nerve hiding behind the 5 colt defenders. All he had to do is say excuse me..and cut in front of all those defenders and catch the ball...wimp. There...see? it could be done. :grin:
And if the Jets ran the same exact play...and instead of going to Baker leaking from the left side...found a wide open Dearth on the right side..it would have brilliant too. Thats the response we would have heard on this board the next day..sorry...I cant believe otherwise. The play was poorly designed and flawed. Thats your argument..and a good one..thats not jets2004. It is beating a dead horse..and maybe its me...I get a little testy with people saying they love an onside kick...but not a fourth and 2 at the goal line. I look at this year as a rebuilding year...I look at Mangini telling his players he trusts them...while still trying to win the game. I look at the 4th down play as a gut check...something that might not pay off this year...perhaps next year..when the team is in better shape on defense..and perhaps with a developing franchise running back. I see the onside kick as a much bigger risk then going for it on fourth down. I could be wrong...I just dont get it.
I didnt even see this post before I posted the one above...if you want to argue the play call..or selection..as baamf did..fine...the decision to go for it? But liked the onside kick? Like you stated above....its deeper than that.
I have quotes saved from 1997 when Parcells was the Gunslinger and made some "questionable" calls int he Detroit game (as well as all year) Francessa was ALL for it then - the logic is, these coaches are unpredictable - Everyone was pissed when we were able to sit here and call the plays before the Jets ran them - NOW, you take the good with the bad - Good coaches are unpredictable cuz they make calls and aren't afraid... Yeah, the 4th down call goes ahand and hand with the Onsides call... Just like the people mad at Parcells - The guy had an offense that couldn't get out of it's own way and a decimated OL and TRIED to make something happen. If Francessa said anything different yesterday I would have made my 1st call ever to sports show today to battle the Fat guy. He's lucky.
The bottom line is if that 4th down play would have resulted in a TD this week would be wall to wall coverage of how Mangini is a shoe in for Coach of the year by our beloved arm chair sports pundits. The thing about the Jets that I love now is that they are exciting and have teams off balance. 3rd and long under Herm? We all knew what was coming...a stupid halfback draw.
Onside Kick Brad Smith 4th Down Conversion 4th and Goal play Only two of the three gambles worked. Guess which won are people against? the one that didn't work. Go Figure. 3pts against the Colts might as well be 0. How long did it take Manning to score that last TD with 2:20 left and ZERO timeouts.
Typical "words in my mouth" type of post. All I said was once they did the onside kick (obviously, I couldn't "first guess" that one) I can at least see what they were thinking, but with the 4th and goal situation, I was screaming at my set PRIOR to the play. MY WIFE SAID SHE THOUGHT IT WAS DUMB AND SHE DOESN'T KNOW FOOTBALL.. EDIT: CORRECTION: She probably does know more football than a good % of people here.
You're wrong here, in my opinion. Gambles in the MIDDLE OF THE FIELD are much less risky than gambles at the goal line. Yes, there is much more reward by the goal line, but there is much more risk. The point you guys miss is the timing in the game. The other gambles were EARLY, when it was NOT established we'd do something offensively (it sure looked like we were struggling). The FG debate was in a 14-14 game near the end of the 3rd quarter. TAKE THE FG. It would have changed the way the rest of the game was played, not to mention kept our MOMENTUM GOING. WITH THAT ALL SAID: I'd rather see our coach take TOO MANY gambles and fail occassionally than take 0 gambles (last staff) and never have a chance to succeed.
I think this is something most of us can agree on. I didn't have a major problem with the call on 4th down, I was much more upset at the playcalling during the sequence then trying to punch it in the end zone.
I'll be honest...I would have done neither the onside kick nor the 4th and goal play action pass. And that's why Mangini is the 35-yr-old HC of the NYJ, and I'm a 46-yr-old chump on the skids....
That was the main goal behind the post...just wanted you throw a line out there like that. Its typical of your posts...not necassary...a lot of chest beating...just like your approval of a successful onside kick. Ok...Im done...and thanks.
Pathetic.. Your main goal is to get someone to throw out a line instead of discussing football... No chest beating at all. THe onside kick gamble wasn't a bad one at the time in my opinion, especially since Westoff saw, IN FILM, that early in the game the colts specials take liberties getting back to block. I didn't say that, Rhodes did. You just think it's awful when someone disagrees with you. Sorry, I do not think going for it on 4th and 2 late in the 3rd of a tie game was the right move. This has absolutely nothing to do with the onside kick.. the 2 are 100% unrelated.
Someones not very happy with me today. Maybe I should go to the Ben Graham thread where only football is disccussed. Hey..if it makes you feel better...I was for the Jets going for 1 after the first touchdown....seriously.
you're right... you are taking this thread down the same path OTHERS took the Ben Graham one... Go for it if you wish.
No..thats it..Im done. I thought it was a dumb statement for someone to say that they were for the onside kick after the fact...you thought it wasnt. Thats all.
