Post Game Analysis (vs. Saints)

People forget we scored on a draw. We ran the draw because chances are it wouldn't result in a TD and we could drain another 30 seconds off the clock and a few yards closer. I dont think Sing & Co. expected to to go for a TD

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

Exactly what i just said, good post Bob.

I'm pretty sure onside kick recovery rate is much higher, around 40% I think?

I suppose if someone has advanced stats out there, they could tell us which strategy was better, but I suspect the end results would be pretty similar, not decisively one way or the other

Originally posted by nj9er:
People forget we scored on a draw. We ran the draw because chances are it wouldn't result in a TD and we could drain another 30 seconds off the clock and a few yards closer. I dont think Sing & Co. expected to to go for a TD

also this, its hard to know what our exact strategy was with regards to the clock because Gore scored on a 7 yard draw play

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

Exactly what i just said, good post Bob.

I'm pretty sure onside kick recovery rate is much higher, around 40% I think?

I suppose if someone has advanced stats out there, they could tell us which strategy was better, but I suspect the end results would be pretty similar, not decisively one way or the other

40% if that was the case why would you ever even kick off?

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Right... and had they milked the clock and failed the 2 pt. conversion, they put themselves in a tight spot to recover the on-side kick and make it down to FG range. Stupid.

The defense had been playing well enough that it was reasonable to believe they could hold the Saints. They didn't, that's just how it goes. The offense played the final drive perfectly. Hindsight is always 20/20.

this right here

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

Exactly what i just said, good post Bob.

I'm pretty sure onside kick recovery rate is much higher, around 40% I think?

I suppose if someone has advanced stats out there, they could tell us which strategy was better, but I suspect the end results would be pretty similar, not decisively one way or the other

40% if that was the case why would you ever even kick off?

whoops I just looked it up, looks like its closer to 25%

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

It doesn't matter about the %. Bottomline is that if the niners miss the 2 point conversion (according to you there is a 60% chance they would) then they need enough time to try an onside kick, take the 10% chance that they get it, and us the 1:30 to get into FG range.

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

Exactly what i just said, good post Bob.

I'm pretty sure onside kick recovery rate is much higher, around 40% I think?

I suppose if someone has advanced stats out there, they could tell us which strategy was better, but I suspect the end results would be pretty similar, not decisively one way or the other

40% if that was the case why would you ever even kick off?

whoops I just looked it up, looks like its closer to 25%

But that number includes surprise onside kicks too. When a team knows its coming its closer to 10%.

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

Exactly what i just said, good post Bob.

I'm pretty sure onside kick recovery rate is much higher, around 40% I think?

I suppose if someone has advanced stats out there, they could tell us which strategy was better, but I suspect the end results would be pretty similar, not decisively one way or the other

40% if that was the case why would you ever even kick off?

whoops I just looked it up, looks like its closer to 25%

But that number includes surprise onside kicks too. When a team knows its coming its closer to 10%.

Why does the 10% matter, when there was a 60% chance that we wouldn't convert the 2 point conversion and would have to take our chances on the onside kick no matter what % recovery rate it was.

Bottom line is that we don't know what the exact strategy was because we did run the ball, except we scored on it from 7 yards out. Maybe we were trying to run the clock down on that play, who knows.

There's way too many variables to consider when you say that we should've scored after running down the clock...for one thing we were already in goal-to-go situation so we only had 2 more downs to use if Gore had been stopped, and we had no timeouts left either. You can't just assume we'd score on those last two downs, let alone convert the 2 pt conversion.

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

Exactly what i just said, good post Bob.

I'm pretty sure onside kick recovery rate is much higher, around 40% I think?

I suppose if someone has advanced stats out there, they could tell us which strategy was better, but I suspect the end results would be pretty similar, not decisively one way or the other

40% if that was the case why would you ever even kick off?

whoops I just looked it up, looks like its closer to 25%

But that number includes surprise onside kicks too. When a team knows its coming its closer to 10%.

Why does the 10% matter, when there was a 60% chance that we wouldn't convert the 2 point conversion and would have to take our chances on the onside kick no matter what % recovery rate it was.

Thats playing scared and results in losses. Failure is not an option and thats not how you coach a team. WE WILL SCORE A TD AND WE WILL GET THE 2 POINT AND WE WILL NOT LEAVE THE SAINTS ANY TIME. Thats how you coach a team. You either get it done or you dont.

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

Exactly what i just said, good post Bob.

I'm pretty sure onside kick recovery rate is much higher, around 40% I think?

I suppose if someone has advanced stats out there, they could tell us which strategy was better, but I suspect the end results would be pretty similar, not decisively one way or the other

40% if that was the case why would you ever even kick off?

whoops I just looked it up, looks like its closer to 25%

But that number includes surprise onside kicks too. When a team knows its coming its closer to 10%.

Why does the 10% matter, when there was a 60% chance that we wouldn't convert the 2 point conversion and would have to take our chances on the onside kick no matter what % recovery rate it was.

Thats playing scared and results in losses. Failure is not an option and thats not how you coach a team. WE WILL SCORE A TD AND WE WILL GET THE 2 POINT AND WE WILL NOT LEAVE THE SAINTS ANY TIME. Thats how you coach a team. You either get it done or you dont.

You know that could go both ways. WE WILL SCORE A TD AND WE WILL GET THE 2 POINT AND WE WILL STOP YOU FROM SCORING, NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE. I mean, we are supposed to have a dominant Defense, correct? (I still think we do regardless of the outcome of that last drive)

This is an offense that is just finding its way and to expect them to put together a time-killing drive while we are BEHIND, is pretty insane considering their output the previous outing.

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

Exactly what i just said, good post Bob.

I'm pretty sure onside kick recovery rate is much higher, around 40% I think?

I suppose if someone has advanced stats out there, they could tell us which strategy was better, but I suspect the end results would be pretty similar, not decisively one way or the other

40% if that was the case why would you ever even kick off?

whoops I just looked it up, looks like its closer to 25%

But that number includes surprise onside kicks too. When a team knows its coming its closer to 10%.

Why does the 10% matter, when there was a 60% chance that we wouldn't convert the 2 point conversion and would have to take our chances on the onside kick no matter what % recovery rate it was.

Thats playing scared and results in losses. Failure is not an option and thats not how you coach a team. WE WILL SCORE A TD AND WE WILL GET THE 2 POINT AND WE WILL NOT LEAVE THE SAINTS ANY TIME. Thats how you coach a team. You either get it done or you dont.

How is it playing scared when they let the D go out on the field? They trust the D.

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

Exactly what i just said, good post Bob.

I'm pretty sure onside kick recovery rate is much higher, around 40% I think?

I suppose if someone has advanced stats out there, they could tell us which strategy was better, but I suspect the end results would be pretty similar, not decisively one way or the other

40% if that was the case why would you ever even kick off?

whoops I just looked it up, looks like its closer to 25%

But that number includes surprise onside kicks too. When a team knows its coming its closer to 10%.

Why does the 10% matter, when there was a 60% chance that we wouldn't convert the 2 point conversion and would have to take our chances on the onside kick no matter what % recovery rate it was.

Thats playing scared and results in losses. Failure is not an option and thats not how you coach a team. WE WILL SCORE A TD AND WE WILL GET THE 2 POINT AND WE WILL NOT LEAVE THE SAINTS ANY TIME. Thats how you coach a team. You either get it done or you dont.

How is it playing scared when they let the D go out on the field? They trust the D.

Playing scared would be leaving time on the clock because you dont think you can get the td and the 2 point. Thats playing scared and not confident!

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by Dominate:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by znk916:
I like how he just ignores the possibility of failing the 2 pt conversion and not having enough time left to recover an onside kick and kick a fg.

Valid point, but if you look at the odds the chances of a success on a 2pt conversion are 40% and onside kick around 10%. The Saints getting in FG range with 2 to's and 1:30 were probably 50%. Replay the same game 100 times and running down the clock would have produced the best results.

Exactly what i just said, good post Bob.

I'm pretty sure onside kick recovery rate is much higher, around 40% I think?

I suppose if someone has advanced stats out there, they could tell us which strategy was better, but I suspect the end results would be pretty similar, not decisively one way or the other

40% if that was the case why would you ever even kick off?

whoops I just looked it up, looks like its closer to 25%

But that number includes surprise onside kicks too. When a team knows its coming its closer to 10%.

Why does the 10% matter, when there was a 60% chance that we wouldn't convert the 2 point conversion and would have to take our chances on the onside kick no matter what % recovery rate it was.

Thats playing scared and results in losses. Failure is not an option and thats not how you coach a team. WE WILL SCORE A TD AND WE WILL GET THE 2 POINT AND WE WILL NOT LEAVE THE SAINTS ANY TIME. Thats how you coach a team. You either get it done or you dont.

How is it playing scared when they let the D go out on the field? They trust the D.

Playing scared would be leaving time on the clock because you dont think you can get the td and the 2 point. Thats playing scared and not confident!

I think playing scared is trying to waste time and thinking that the D won't stop the other team.