View Full Version : Have ANY of Jauron's Gambles Worked This Season?
Meathead
10-09-2006, 09:04 AM
lets start counting all the jauron gambles this season and see how they have worked out
just off the top of my head to start out with:
at patriots: fourth and long one at the seven with a ten point lead. result: disasterous failure
jets: at about the thirty-five, fake fg. result: failed play
jets: third and three at the three, losman naked bootleg. result: lost two yards
at bears: fourth and two at the forty. result: false start
at bears: fake punt. result: fumbled by moorman, failed play
bigbub2352
10-09-2006, 10:10 AM
Nope, and for someone who doest want our young team to make mistakes he has made like 5
BillsFever21
10-09-2006, 10:27 AM
Absolutely none of his gambles or trick plays have worked. They hurt us in the Patriots and Jets game that lead to us losing the games.
OpIv37
10-09-2006, 10:29 AM
lets start counting all the jauron gambles this season and see how they have worked out
just off the top of my head to start out with:
at patriots: fourth and long one at the seven with a ten point lead. result: disasterous failure
jets: at about the thirty-five, fake fg. result: failed play
jets: third and three at the three, losman naked bootleg. result: lost two yards
at bears: fourth and two at the forty. result: false start
at bears: fake punt. result: fumbled by moorman, failed play
you forgot the Losman bootleg on the goal-line against the Jets that went for a huge loss.
MikeInRoch
10-09-2006, 12:59 PM
at bears: fourth and two at the forty. result: false start
Going for a 4th down had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that there was s false start. Are you saying that if it had been 3rd down, there would not have been a penalty?
patmoran2006
10-09-2006, 01:02 PM
Going for a 4th down had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that there was s false start. Are you saying that if it had been 3rd down, there would not have been a penalty?
According to the press conferences that I read, it wasn't a fake punt, actually. Does noone see how bad the snap was? He went right to try to catch the crappy snap, not to run with it. The running started only after he had dropped it and it was too late to punt.
horsecrap.. go back and watch the replays.. All kinds fo players pulled to the right and formed a wall.. If Moorman handled the punt easily he could have walked to a first down.. it was a designed fake.
bocephuz
10-09-2006, 01:14 PM
How about the onside pooch kick vs. Minnesota? If not for the incorrect call by the refs that would've worked perfectly.
I think the fake punt at Chicago was a good call. Jauron knew the Bills only had a puncher's chance to win this game and that his young squad had to throw the kitchen sink early or else.
Meathead
10-09-2006, 01:20 PM
you forgot the Losman bootleg on the goal-line against the Jets that went for a huge loss.
read closer my young jedi
Earthquake Enyart
10-09-2006, 01:22 PM
lets start counting all the jauron gambles this season and see how they have worked out
just off the top of my head to start out with:
at patriots: fourth and long one at the seven with a ten point lead. result: disasterous failure
jets: at about the thirty-five, fake fg. result: failed play
jets: third and three at the three, losman naked bootleg. result: lost two yards
at bears: fourth and two at the forty. result: false start
at bears: fake punt. result: fumbled by moorman, failed play
I have no problem with any of these calls.
ajsdx
10-09-2006, 01:24 PM
I have no problem with any of these calls.
I might have made a couple of different calls on some of these occasions, but in principle, i agree. I like the aggressiveness since none of our players know how to win yet.
Meathead
10-09-2006, 01:31 PM
Going for a 4th down had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that there was s false start. Are you saying that if it had been 3rd down, there would not have been a penalty?
oh yeah thats exactly what i said you got me
it was a gamble. it didnt work. no place have i indicated whether it was right or wrong, i just asked a question
MikeInRoch
10-09-2006, 01:42 PM
horsecrap.. go back and watch the replays.. All kinds fo players pulled to the right and formed a wall.. If Moorman handled the punt easily he could have walked to a first down.. it was a designed fake.
You are right - I was wrong with this one. Which is why I edited my original repsonse.
MikeInRoch
10-09-2006, 01:43 PM
oh yeah thats exactly what i said you got me
it was a gamble. it didnt work. no place have i indicated whether it was right or wrong, i just asked a question
What I'm saying is that it is an attmpted gamble that never actually took place.
Mitchy moo
10-09-2006, 01:43 PM
Come to think of it, I really can't say that all our gambles were worth it by any stretch. I do think that the Bills players need to learn from mistakes and obviously the coaches as well.
MikeInRoch
10-09-2006, 01:43 PM
I have no problem with any of these calls.
I agree. I like all of these calls.
casdhf
10-09-2006, 01:57 PM
The fake punt would have worked if moorman got a good snap. I don't have as much problem with many of the calls as I do the execution of the plays.
We also got ****ed on the squib kick.
Jan Reimers
10-09-2006, 02:00 PM
I think he won $5.00 in the New York State Lottery.
Meathead
10-10-2006, 03:20 PM
well since we havent come up any more we will go with these. i cant think of any from the other two games but if you do just speak up
at patriots: fourth and long one at the seven with a ten point lead. result: disasterous failure
jets: at about the thirty-five, fake fg. result: failed play
jets: third and three at the three, losman naked bootleg. result: lost two yards
vikings: pooch kickoff, fielded by the bills, penalty negates play
at bears: fourth and two at the forty. result: false start
at bears: fake punt. result: fumbled by moorman, failed play
first point: the only one i have a problem with is passing up the fg in ne, and i have a huge problem with that. it was a mistake, case closed, and i hope to never see it done again
second point: two of those plays appear to be bad luck that they didnt work - the pooch ko and the fake punt both should have worked but neither did
third point: so regardless of reason every gamble we came up with has failed
main questions: should the coaches reexamine their committment to those plays? how many of those attempts should they be making? is it just a matter of execution that the talent-rich bills st have to start applying better? or are we starting to see why bears fans grew so disenchanted with jauron so quickly?
i honestly dont know the answer to those questions but id sure like to know the answers
I liked all the calls except kicking the FG myself. It's too bad none of them worked but everyone would have a different tune had they all worked or maybe just some of them...then we may be calling him a genius and only have one loss. I really think DJ knows we're a bit lacking in the talent department (he's aware of some gaping holes) so he feels he's not going to be able to play that ultra-conservative game and win consistently...so these plays are making up for some of that inadequacy. Unfortunately, they have shot us in the foot but not as much as turnovers and penalties...funny how all of these things go back to the players on the field not a play call. It's the players who failed to execute, it's the players who are turning the ball over and it's the players taking the penalties.
HHURRICANE
10-10-2006, 03:41 PM
This site is really starting to irk me. Meathead made a valid point here.
People the plays didn't work. PERIOD. I like the coaching staff but they are accountable. I like JP as well but he's accountable as well.
This team isn't strong enough or confident enough to pull off what the coaching staff is asking of them. Belicheck goes for it on 4th and 1 because he knows his team has the confidence to get it. We don't.
I want to win the winnable games. Chicago gets a pass but I don't want another Jets game. This team needs to keep winning before we open up the playbook further.
one of the things I've always thought about any team in the NFL that 'claims' to be competitive is they need to be able to get a yard when needed. I think this is a very good measuring stick as to the quality of the team. Good ones get it and not so good ones don't.
HHURRICANE
10-10-2006, 03:51 PM
one of the things I've always thought about any team in the NFL that 'claims' to be competitive is they need to be able to get a yard when needed. I think this is a very good measuring stick as to the quality of the team. Good ones get it and not so good ones don't.
Okay, my faith in this Board has been reborn. An intelligent post.
John Doe
10-10-2006, 04:46 PM
Since when do bootlegs on third downs constitute a "gamble?" If an off-tackle run by McGahee would have failed in the same situation, would that have been a gamble?
And, how is a penalty on 4th down at the 40 a disaster. All that happens is that you punt from 5 yards further back.
Really stretching it on those 2.
And, how is a penalty on 4th down at the 40 a disaster. All that happens is that you punt from 5 yards further back.
it's a disaster when you need a short yard...
John Doe
10-10-2006, 04:58 PM
it's a disaster when you need a short yard...
MH's point was that going for it was a gamble that did not pay off. After the penalty, it ceased to be a gamble at all - just a punt from 5 yards further. The penalty turned a gamble into a non-gamble.
It is a gamble that does not pay off if they go for it, don't make it, and turn it over on downs.
MH's point was that going for it was a gamble that did not pay off. After the penalty, it ceased to be a gamble at all - just a punt from 5 yards further. The penalty turned a gamble into a non-gamble.
It is a gamble that does not pay off if they go for it, don't make it, and turn it over on downs.
I'm not following you. It was 4th and inches. We were lining up and going for it. That was a gamble. We took a penalty. We lined up and ran the fake punt play. Also a gamble. Where did we not gamble in either situation? It was less of a gamble to have the QB take the snap and sneak or run WM in there because those guys do that sort of thing. It was more of a gamble to have Moorman (who is a good athlete) to take a snap and run with the ball...he doesn't do that sort of thing normally. It showed. He started running before the snap was in his hands (a typical mistake for someone who doesn't do it all the time). Too bad it was clear he was going to get a first down and then some. Remember a couple seasons ago when right before he punted he decided to throw the ball to a wide open guy on a play that wasn't even designed as a fake? He's got it in him to make those plays but it's still a gamble.
What's so hard to understand here?
John Doe
10-10-2006, 05:14 PM
If going for it on 4th and inches is a gamble, then the penalty negates it.
The fake punt then becomes the gamble, not the 4th and inches since the 4th and inches play does not actually take place because of the penalty.
If going for it on 4th and inches is a gamble, then the penalty negates it.
The fake punt then becomes the gamble, not the 4th and inches since the 4th and inches play does not actually take place because of the penalty.
:rolleyes:
Meathead
10-12-2006, 08:11 AM
the decision was a gamble whether the play actually ran or not, they intended to take the gamble and it failed
but more importantly ...
Meathead
10-12-2006, 08:13 AM
... once again the meathead is out in front on an observation
notice i posted this question early in the week and a couple days later now EVERYBODY is talking about the same exact thing
when are you *****es just going to take my words as gospel bwahaha
i rawwk :rockout:
RedEyE
10-12-2006, 08:27 AM
We are 1-4 in 4th down attempts. I'd say no.
sounds ****ty when you think about it!
YardRat
10-12-2006, 10:28 AM
The onside kick against the Jets worked.
I agree with those who contend better execution of the play on the field would've led to more success. Even the simplest and most conservative of play calls aren't going to be successful if hand-cuffed by penalties, poor snaps, dropped balls, etc.
I would've gone for the three in NE also, but let's face it...a bad snap or hold and the FG's no good. Hell...one missed block and it could've been swatted down and returned for a TD going the other way.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.