Win or lose in OT, Siriani is a horse's ass

[Painter]

Larry: I thought departure from my usual rule of decorum was justified (and apt) under the unique set of circumstances. LOL

Understood. Fair enough, Bob.

[Bob In PA]

If you think about it... Siriani required his team to win yesterday's game TWICE (while getting credit in the standings for only a single win).

Pro players may be asked occasionally to do the impossible, the improbable or the unlikely, but they certainly do NOT appreciate being asked to do the unnecessary.

Just to mention one obvious contingency, a teammate key to their drive back to the Super Bowl could have been lost for the year during the overtime period.

Bob

[LennG]

 Bob, Regardless if he is a horses ass, as you say, he wins football games. He is inventive (that new type of QB sneak) and he has taken a so-so QB and made him competitive for the league MVP.

Nothing against Daboill, but I would take him in a minute if he were to leave Philly and want to come here. Jerk or not, he wins.

[zephirus]

Maybe I'm in the minority, not in hating Siriani or the Eagles but I didn't second-guess the move.  There are so many things that can go wrong with the "milking the clock" scenario - you could become too predictable and not get enough rushing yardage to make the field goal "more makeable".  You could miss the field goal or having something go wrong with the snap/spot operation, etc.  I don't mind a coach staying aggressive, trusting his defense to carry the day and going for a kill shot.

I was disappointed that Ron Rivera didn't go for 2.  Despite what was said here, that's DEFINITELY in his character - he's known as "Riverboat Ron" for a reason but for some reason yesterday stayed conservative. 

[Bob In PA]

Bob, Regardless if he is a horses ass, as you say, he wins football games. He is inventive (that new type of QB sneak) and he has taken a so-so QB and made him competitive for the league MVP.

Nothing against Daboill, but I would take him in a minute if he were to leave Philly and want to come here. Jerk or not, he wins.

Lenn: Don't fall for the hype.

Siriani wins so many games ONLY because (1) he meets the minimum requirements for an NFL head coach; and (2) he has a group of players good enough to make up for his many mistakes. 

Conversely, Daboll (or fill in any other name) fails to win as many games because (1) his players are not as good as Siriani's; and (2) he does not possess a magic wand which might enable him to overcome the discrepancy.

Bob

[Bob In PA]

Maybe I'm in the minority, not in hating Siriani or the Eagles but I didn't second-guess the move.  There are so many things that can go wrong with the "milking the clock" scenario - you could become too predictable and not get enough rushing yardage to make the field goal "more makeable".  You could miss the field goal or having something go wrong with the snap/spot operation, etc.  I don't mind a coach staying aggressive, trusting his defense to carry the day and going for a kill shot.

I was disappointed that Ron Rivera didn't go for 2.  Despite what was said here, that's DEFINITELY in his character - he's known as "Riverboat Ron" for a reason but for some reason yesterday stayed conservative. 

Lee: As for the first paragraph, even if defensible for the many good reasons you cite, the move doesn't make sense because they are all true of ANY situation.  Stuff can go wrong.  What you're really arguing is that it is never a bad thing to score points. Maybe, but one of the smartest players in the league refused last night to score a touchdown against the Jets and took a knee to allow the clock run out and guaranty going home a winner.

As for the second paragraph, I was being sarcastic in comparing Rivera to Coughlin and forgot the sarcasm indicator. If it were against the Giants I have no doubt Riverboat Ron would have gone for two.  I guess he just doesn't trust his young QB enough (or yet) in that situation, playing against a solid defense.

Bob

PS. Fixed it.

[TDToomer]

Maybe I'm in the minority, not in hating Siriani or the Eagles but I didn't second-guess the move.  There are so many things that can go wrong with the "milking the clock" scenario - you could become too predictable and not get enough rushing yardage to make the field goal "more makeable".  You could miss the field goal or having something go wrong with the snap/spot operation, etc.  I don't mind a coach staying aggressive, trusting his defense to carry the day and going for a kill shot.

I was disappointed that Ron Rivera didn't go for 2.  Despite what was said here, that's DEFINITELY in his character - he's known as "Riverboat Ron" for a reason but for some reason yesterday stayed conservative. 

Great point. We saw the milking the clock fail in Coughlin's final season with a comical series of mishaps leading to a loss.

I can't help sensing jealousy of Siriani and the Eagles in this thread. We would love to be as hated. 

[Symphony Steve]

Maybe I'm in the minority, not in hating Siriani or the Eagles but I didn't second-guess the move.  There are so many things that can go wrong with the "milking the clock" scenario - you could become too predictable and not get enough rushing yardage to make the field goal "more makeable".  You could miss the field goal or having something go wrong with the snap/spot operation, etc.  I don't mind a coach staying aggressive, trusting his defense to carry the day and going for a kill shot.

I was disappointed that Ron Rivera didn't go for 2.  Despite what was said here, that's DEFINITELY in his character - he's known as "Riverboat Ron" for a reason but for some reason yesterday stayed conservative. 

The real problem was the taunting penalty.  Had Brown not done that, it would've been difficult to drive the field in the remaining time. As it was, the Commanders made it b/c of a 'three-second' incomplete pass play.

The call sucked only if Siriani anticipated the taunting call, which was the right call.

[Bob In PA]

Great point. We saw the milking the clock fail in Coughlin's final season with a comical series of mishaps leading to a loss.

I can't help sensing jealousy of Siriani and the Eagles in this thread. We would love to be as hated. 

TD: I forgot to mention to Lee (zephirus) that the inherent weakness in his argument is that all of the very same "worries" he correctly mentioned as applicable to running out the clock (playing the odds) apply EVEN MORE SO to what they actually did.

The WR could have stumbled, tipped the ball up on the air, the pass could have been off-target, intercepted, etc., The QB could have been sacked, fumbled the ball, etc.  The OL could have committed a penalty taking them out of field goal range, etc.

In short, Siriani's move ADDED TO AND AMPLIFIED the inherent "risks" of running ANY football play. IMO the move was indefensible.... notwithstanding Lee's strong effort to make a case to the contrary.

Bob

[zephirus]

TD: I forgot to mention to Lee (zephirus) that the inherent weakness in his argument is that all of the very same "worries" he correctly mentioned as applicable to running out the clock (playing the odds) apply EVEN MORE SO to what they actually did.

The WR could have stumbled, tipped the ball up on the air, the pass could have been off-target, intercepted, etc., The QB could have been sacked, fumbled the ball, etc.  The OL could have committed a penalty taking them out of field goal range, etc.

In short, Siriani's move ADDED TO AND AMPLIFIED the inherent "risks" of running ANY football play. IMO the move was indefensible.... notwithstanding Lee's strong effort to make a case to the contrary.

Bob

While that's all true - here's the thing.  The defense in this scenario is 100% expecting a run-run-run offensive mentality.  They're going to stack the line.  The linebackers are going to cheat up.  Corners are gonna press.  They're going to try to stand up the ball-carrier and look to force a fumble.  I think the element of surprise here is what made this play effective and inherently reduced the risk of going long.  The double-move was effective because the corner was cheating.  Additionally, assuming it goes right, you're forcing the other team into a touchdown or die scenario instead of potentially a long FG to re-tie the game.

Looking at the play-by-play the Eagles were facing a 2nd and 4 with 1:49 left, and the Commanders had only one time out left.  Let's say the Eagles run 2 more time into a stacked defense and come up with a 4th and 2, forcing the Commanders to use their last time out and kick a FG to go up 3 with ~1 minute left.  Would you rather be up by 7 leaving the Commanders 1:36 and one timeout or up by 3 leaving the Commanders with a minute and no timeouts?  Probably splitting hairs here but again, I didn't think it was bone-headed to go for the kill in that scenario. 

[Bob In PA]

While that's all true - here's the thing.  The defense in this scenario is 100% expecting a run-run-run offensive mentality.  They're going to stack the line.  The linebackers are going to cheat up.  Corners are gonna press.  They're going to try to stand up the ball-carrier and look to force a fumble.  I think the element of surprise here is what made this play effective and inherently reduced the risk of going long.  The double-move was effective because the corner was cheating.  Additionally, assuming it goes right, you're forcing the other team into a touchdown or die scenario instead of potentially a long FG to re-tie the game.

Looking at the play-by-play the Eagles were facing a 2nd and 4 with 1:49 left, and the Commanders had only one time out left.  Let's say the Eagles run 2 more time into a stacked defense and come up with a 4th and 2, forcing the Commanders to use their last time out and kick a FG to go up 3 with ~1 minute left.  Would you rather be up by 7 leaving the Commanders 1:36 and one timeout or up by 3 leaving the Commanders with a minute and no timeouts?  Probably splitting hairs here but again, I didn't think it was bone-headed to go for the kill in that scenario. 

Lee: I wouldn't have expected anything less than to have you bolster your already-solid argument. My only remark aside from "well done" is that, aside from probably establishing the move wasn't completely bone-headed, it was still IMO the wrong move. It will be interesting to watch as his career continues to see if there are any more such moves (if not bone-headed, then let's call them "chutzpah-heavy") that do blow up in his face. Remember, the fans at the stadium WILL soon have snowballs (whether or not it has actually snowed LOL).  Nice job. Bob

[TDToomer]

Should AJ Brown just taken a knee at the 1 and then let the clock run down to either score a TD or FG?

[Bob In PA]

Should AJ Brown just taken a knee at the 1 and then let the clock run down to either score a TD or FG?

TD: What do you think? IMO that's a lot to ask of a guy running at top speed. Also, I think he gets paid by the TD so that would have cost him a bag of chips.  Bob

[TDToomer]

TD: What do you think? IMO that's a lot to ask of a guy running at top speed. Also, I think he gets paid by the TD so that would have cost him a bag of chips.  Bob

Didn't Mahomes do exactly that last night? He ran and could have scored (and scored for many fantasy teams) but gave himself up at the 2 yard line. So no it's not a lot to ask. If Brown was ordered to not score/give them the ball back, and he defied his coaches because of incentive clauses well then he is a selfish XXXXX. But back to my original point, players do this all the time. A defensive back makes a game sealing pick and could go all the way but instead go out of bounds to not risk a turnover. Team first.

[Bob In PA]

Didn't Mahomes do exactly that last night? He ran and could have scored (and scored for many fantasy teams) but gave himself up at the 2 yard line. So no it's not a lot to ask. If Brown was ordered to not score/give them the ball back, and he defied his coaches because of incentive clauses well then he is a selfish XXXXX. But back to my original point, players do this all the time. A defensive back makes a game sealing pick and could go all the way but instead go out of bounds to not risk a turnover. Team first.

TD: Yes.  In fact, I noted it somewhere above in this thread. Bob