the patriots don't call the same plays with the ball on their own 30. Yes if you don't onside kick and the pats run the same 3 plays with the same 3 results 30 yards back we gain field position. But they wouldn't run the same plays
because you are f'ing losing and you need the ball to score. at least Rex is learning that. dumbass thread.
I get the riverboat gambler thing, but let's assume you recover. We've got the ball at the 45 with 2:30 to go. We aren't scoring a TD there and assuming a FG, Brady is likely to get the ball back to beat us. Kick it deep, stop them, and get the ball back at 1:15 in better field position - say the 30 instead of the 10- that 20 yards was worth about 30 seconds. That's 2-3 more plays to get further into Folks FG range. And I totally get the Monday morning QB criticism. I'm not trashing Rex. Just trying to figure out if the onside kick made sense.
What's more likely, Geno drives 55-60 yards without any timeouts and barely a minute left or they stop the Pats on ONE 'possible' pass play? (remember if they throw an incomplete they give the ball back to us with the full two minutes left and close to FG range, so even Bill might not have neccesarily thrown it there)
If we don't onside kick I doubt we get the ball back as the Pats likely would pass on 3rd down in that situation and end the game without us getting the ball back. The onside kick was the right call and it almost worked.
Not sure. so you would have kicked off? That's fine I don't think its necessarily wrong but it increases the odds of the pats passing in my opinion.
Look, I'm not sure if I should respond in this "Why did we onside kick?" thread or the other "Why did we onside kick?" thread. Which one is more legit? _
being down 2 points I think the right call was to kickoff and play defense. if it was more than three points I could go either way. obviously that changes the pats mentality but we had been playing very good defense for most of that game and had proven we could go 3 and out.
I couldn't disagree more with the idea that the Onsides Kick was a bad idea. The defense did not play well tonight. Folk almost made it happen and if we came up with it, it would have been huge.
Passing the ball in that spot would still be pretty ballsy even for Bill, it could be the difference between giving it up with 1:55 left and 1:15. Against Peyton Manning he definitely passes since not getting the first down would be tantamount to sure defeat there but I don't know if he gets that desperate with Geno Smith against his D.
We also had proven in that game and in the past that the pats at anytime can work their offense on our defense. I think it's a borderline call and would have gone onside. I think if we kicked it off, we never get it back
I would have donethe onside kick because I didn't believe they could stop Brady, and it almost worked. Plus we only had one time out.
I'm not gonna get on Rex for the onside kick. It was just a gamble that didn't work out.. Oh well. get on him for spending his timeouts like a emotional woman at the mall, sure, but not the onside kick
I personally don't think the Jets blew this game because of Geno or with coaching decisions/game management (although burning 2 second half timeouts in the third quarter was not good). The defense did not get it done. Point blank. Gave up 27 pts, got one sack, and once again didn't force a turnover. It seems that vaunted front 7 is not nearly as good as most of us wanted to believe it was. The Onsides kick seemed like a no-brainer to me.
Why not? I mean seriously how many people don't understand the chances of us getting the ball back had we kicked it deep were slim to none. All the patriots needed was one first down. They wouldn't have been as conservative as they were had we kicked it deep. We had a better chance getting the onside kick than holding Brady to a 3 and out. It's a complete different story if we hadn't wasted all our timeouts like we always do.
