, no harm done, and in retrospect, I reread your post, and as noted, I noted the AS reference, and we WERE talking about two entirely different things. Sorry for the confusion.
jonnydel and Adrian
I respect you guys and am in the process of completely relearning football as I thot I knew it since back in the B & W 12" TV days, that broadcast the mudbowl, circa 1956. After h.s. and then college, I have just watched games and thot I knew what I was seeing...but obviously didn't .Thanks to you two and Thl, and NC, it has been a revelation, not to mention a fascinating experience. But... I certainly agree the 2nd half we were coached a lot better, or heck, even well. The first half, however, had this been an elite team, which we face from here on out, we would have been blown out of the tub. The craziness of the calls, the nutty sequences, finding a winner and then going away from it, the disjointedness of what was being called...gad, it was painful...and also, nowhere near enough to get us past our first playoff game...let alone any others.
so I ask you: just exactly what would you all recommend we do, coaching wise, to get an entire game coached coherently? I wouldn't worry as bad if this were a first time event...but it isn't. It is the antithesis of a BW coached game, with the first 25 plays written on a cardboard. Here the first half is just by gosh and by golly, no reasoning, no direction, nothing. How in the world do we win from here on if we play goofball football the first half? Frankly we were lucky to win this one, giving the first half away like it didn't matter. Maybe some of this is on the players, but #81 and #15 were ready to play...not so much some of the others. But overall,the coaching calls in first half were epically bad. Why and how is this fixed? Or, can it be?
Rereading this maybe I answered my own question. Should we be using 25 scripted plays for the first half? Can't be any worse than it is now.
[ Edited by pasodoc9er on Dec 24, 2013 at 4:09 PM ]