Another thread there has a poll asking if the Chiefs will do better next year, and one possible answer is "Not as long as Herm is still here they will do worse." It's remarkable how much like TGG at the end of last season that site looks!
Field Goal Edwards should stop the nonsense and commit to a single-wing or double-wing offense. I think it would be fun. No NFL team has regularly used a single-wing offense since the 1951 Steelers.
You're right. What kind of idiot head coach goes for the FG on 4th and Goal from the 2 in a must win game? What kind of idiot head coach punts on 4th and short from inside the 40? Mangi... Edwards is an idiot! I'm so glad we don't have a coach that would do such things.
What does Mangini have to do with this thread? Also, what must-win game are you talking about? RE: the punt. Why is that an issue?
No I'm saying that he is just as conservative as Herm, but most of the posters overlook that and, pardon my french, lick Mangini's balls. With his 'prevent the win D' and chicken play calling at the big times, Mangini should be looked down on by tghe same posters that bash Herm. But he is not.
I had to ask earlier in the thread because I had no idea what the heck you were talking about. The problem was you didn't either. What you are talking about was a 4th-and-3. Not a 4th-and-2. One yard makes a big difference in that spot. It's not a conservative decision to kick a field goal on a 4th-and-3 in the 3rd quarter of a 7-point game. ___ Now that that is settled, let's get back to the Chiefs head coach. We can discuss Eric Mangini in the Jets forum.
Yes, we all know that you despise Mangini and adore Edwards, but to say that Mangini is just as conservative as Edwards is absurd. The Jets weren't as daring as they have been in some other games, but they called for a long pass on the second drive, a long pass on the fourth drive, mixed in the no huddle, the shotgun, and so on. That is, they tried to change things up. I'm very sure that the Jets won't be using this film as the prime example of everything going the way they want, but they at least tried not to be totally predictable, and they were playing against a pretty decent defense (sixth in the league in total defense). Let's compare that to the brilliant playcalling exhibited by your hero's team, playing against a below-average defense (21st in the league, and of course awful against the run). As I'm sure you know, the Chiefs did not get a first down on their first seven drives. One might think that they would change things up a bit when their offensive strategy isn't working, but here's how those seven drives went: Run (LJ), run (LJ), short pass (inc). Short pass, run (LJ), short pass (inc). Run (LJ), run (LJ), pass (sack). Run (LJ), run (LJ), run. Short pass (inc), run, short pass (inc). Short pass (inc), run (LJ), short pass. Run (LJ), run (LJ), long pass (inc). That's 10 runs by LJ (for a total of 24 yards), 2 other runs, 7 short passes, 1 long pass, and 1 sack. This might be the most pathetic sequence of playcalling in the history of NFL postseason football, and makes the horrible predictability of his playcalling here pale in comparison. And now he's talking about simplifying the offense?
by the way, englishman just joined cp :lol: this post really cracked me up: By the way, I think Herm should eliminate the playbook. We don't want the players to get confused by actually having to read a "book". Plus, if they have to carry it around, they'll get all fatigued and won't be able to practice and play as well.
hardly. there is a huge difference between kicking a field goal on 4th down after attempting plays that give you a shot at scoring a td, and simply playing it safe, trying to bust it in solely with runs, afraid to pass the ball on the goal line and risk a turnover, and if you are unable to score being glad you got three points. Mangini settles for field goals after failing to score a td because it is the smart thing to do, Herm doesn't play aggressively enough to score td's and plays to set up field goals and is fine with it. just beceause the outcome is the same doesn't mean what preceded it are identical. very specious and poor argument on your part.
