We're an aggressive team, we play aggressive to win - Baker
-
I repeat I was all in for that 4th down call. It tells your team that you trust them to end the game, and leave it in their hands.
Foremost, playing aggressive means playing with no fear. And that's what teams that considere themselves better do.
I repeat I was all in for that 4th down call. It tells your team that you trust them to end the game, and leave it in their hands.
Foremost, playing aggressive means playing with no fear. And that's what teams that considere themselves better do.
I'm in the "kick the FG" camp, but I can definitely appreciate the aggressive nature of the coaching staff. It seems to be the personality of the team, and it's kind of working. The jail-break blitzing really worked at the end, and it's difficult to argue with results! However, I do think Gregg should've mixed it up a bit more early with his blitzes. For instance, on the Broncos first TD drive, we had them 3rd and long a few times and the Broncos converted because they were ready for the heat. Had we shown the typical Gregg Williams 3rd and long pressure, but then pulled back into max zone....I would have been really interested to see if the Broncos' plays would've worked. Obviously there's no way to know, but Gregg has to be careful not to be too predictable. On the Broncos last 3rd and 10, I thought we were ripe for a screen. We brought the house and it worked flawlessly because there were no short routes.
But hey, it's working right now and I LOVE IT. We'll have to be dialed in next week even though the Bengals are starting their backup QB. Something tells me we're in for an absolute war.
-
You can still play aggressive on the most important side of the ball in that instance - defense.
Bottom line, being up one and Denver playing for a FG puts YOU on your heels. Forcing the other team to score a TD with little time and 1 TO puts THEM on their heels. Things worked out and I get that. But it was handled wrong then and you won't find a coach worth their salt that would disagree.
-
-
You can still play aggressive on the most important side of the ball in that instance - defense.
Bottom line, being up one and Denver playing for a FG puts YOU on your heels. Forcing the other team to score a TD with little time and 1 TO puts THEM on their heels. Things worked out and I get that. But it was handled wrong then and you won't find a coach worth their salt that would disagree.
You can still play aggressive on the most important side of the ball in that instance - defense.
Bottom line, being up one and Denver playing for a FG puts YOU on your heels. Forcing the other team to score a TD with little time and 1 TO puts THEM on their heels. Things worked out and I get that. But it was handled wrong then and you won't find a coach worth their salt that would disagree.
Not sure l follow this logic. There are probably degrees to which either side is on their heels in either scenario. The Broncs were technically still losing at that point of the game, backed up and no time outs. To say they weren’t at least a little bit on their heels seems silly.
I was in camp field goal too l guess. But l do have a certain appreciation that Williams gift wrapped his balls, put a little bow around it, and then presented it to the opponent at such a crucial part of the game.
No one ever confused balls with brains.
-
-
I have to wonder how praiseworthy our "aggression" would be around here had Denver made a 60+ yard FG as time expired...
I posted in another thread that going for it on 4th was fine when the clock was running. We hustle to the line, snap and sneak. We had them off balance.
However, once we called time out and allow their D to prepare for the next play a cooler head kicks the FG... THE 27-YD FG.... and force DNV to score a TD to win.
It's the smart play.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
I love the call to go just not the play call. When they came to line and baker saw they were selling out to stop the run that’s when he could change the play and bootleg out and leak the te across the formation. Him being mobile gives him two options pass or run.
-
I love the call to go just not the play call. When they came to line and baker saw they were selling out to stop the run that’s when he could change the play and bootleg out and leak the te across the formation. Him being mobile gives him two options pass or run.
I love the call to go just not the play call. When they came to line and baker saw they were selling out to stop the run that’s when he could change the play and bootleg out and leak the te across the formation. Him being mobile gives him two options pass or run.
I was calling for a Run/pass option in the Tavern. But like Tour once we screwed up the TO before the offside jump, I wanted the FG and let the D keep them out of the endzone. Ball carries a long way for FGs in Denver and a kick from the 50 can make it easily. And the stadium is a true bowl so crosswinds are not too bad unless you have a front flying through. Thank God & Williams for those last two all-out blitzes.
-
You can still play aggressive on the most important side of the ball in that instance - defense.
Bottom line, being up one and Denver playing for a FG puts YOU on your heels. Forcing the other team to score a TD with little time and 1 TO puts THEM on their heels. Things worked out and I get that. But it was handled wrong then and you won't find a coach worth their salt that would disagree.
Not sure l follow this logic. There are probably degrees to which either side is on their heels in either scenario. The Broncs were technically still losing at that point of the game, backed up and no time outs. To say they weren’t at least a little bit on their heels seems silly.
I was in camp field goal too l guess. But l do have a certain appreciation that Williams gift wrapped his balls, put a little bow around it, and then presented it to the opponent at such a crucial part of the game.
No one ever confused balls with brains.
Not sure l follow this logic. There are probably degrees to which either side is on their heels in either scenario. The Broncs were technically still losing at that point of the game, backed up and no time outs. To say they weren’t at least a little bit on their heels seems silly.
I was in camp field goal too l guess. But l do have a certain appreciation that Williams gift wrapped his balls, put a little bow around it, and then presented it to the opponent at such a crucial part of the game.
No one ever confused balls with brains.
One will more than likely get you burned over the other. It's pretty simple though, do you want to face a team that needs a FG to win or a TD? Exactly.
-
Not sure l follow this logic. There are probably degrees to which either side is on their heels in either scenario. The Broncs were technically still losing at that point of the game, backed up and no time outs. To say they weren’t at least a little bit on their heels seems silly.
I was in camp field goal too l guess. But l do have a certain appreciation that Williams gift wrapped his balls, put a little bow around it, and then presented it to the opponent at such a crucial part of the game.
No one ever confused balls with brains.
One will more than likely get you burned over the other. It's pretty simple though, do you want to face a team that needs a FG to win or a TD? Exactly.
One will more than likely get you burned over the other. It's pretty simple though, do you want to face a team that needs a FG to win or a TD? Exactly.
I want to face a team that doesn't have the option to do either. Conservative football doesn't win championships. It might have backfired, but we won. Who knows if we kicked it if the same thing could've happened. One big play or one big penalty and we could've lost.
With one yard to win the game, you try to get the yard in my book.
Hue could've kicked the field goal, had it blocked, and had the Broncos run it back for a TD. I prefer not even giving them the option to win.
-
One will more than likely get you burned over the other. It's pretty simple though, do you want to face a team that needs a FG to win or a TD? Exactly.
I want to face a team that doesn't have the option to do either. Conservative football doesn't win championships. It might have backfired, but we won. Who knows if we kicked it if the same thing could've happened. One big play or one big penalty and we could've lost.
With one yard to win the game, you try to get the yard in my book.
Hue could've kicked the field goal, had it blocked, and had the Broncos run it back for a TD. I prefer not even giving them the option to win.
I want to face a team that doesn't have the option to do either. Conservative football doesn't win championships. It might have backfired, but we won. Who knows if we kicked it if the same thing could've happened. One big play or one big penalty and we could've lost.
With one yard to win the game, you try to get the yard in my book.
Hue could've kicked the field goal, had it blocked, and had the Broncos run it back for a TD. I prefer not even giving them the option to win.
Sure, all of that is POSSIBLE. But I tend to live off of what is most probable.
-
Not sure l follow this logic. There are probably degrees to which either side is on their heels in either scenario. The Broncs were technically still losing at that point of the game, backed up and no time outs. To say they weren’t at least a little bit on their heels seems silly.
I was in camp field goal too l guess. But l do have a certain appreciation that Williams gift wrapped his balls, put a little bow around it, and then presented it to the opponent at such a crucial part of the game.
No one ever confused balls with brains.
One will more than likely get you burned over the other. It's pretty simple though, do you want to face a team that needs a FG to win or a TD? Exactly.
One will more than likely get you burned over the other. It's pretty simple though, do you want to face a team that needs a FG to win or a TD? Exactly.
I know, that’s the fun part! Taking the road less traveled.
-
I have to wonder how praiseworthy our "aggression" would be around here had Denver made a 60+ yard FG as time expired...
I posted in another thread that going for it on 4th was fine when the clock was running. We hustle to the line, snap and sneak. We had them off balance.
However, once we called time out and allow their D to prepare for the next play a cooler head kicks the FG... THE 27-YD FG.... and force DNV to score a TD to win.
It's the smart play.
I have to wonder how praiseworthy our "aggression" would be around here had Denver made a 60+ yard FG as time expired...
I posted in another thread that going for it on 4th was fine when the clock was running. We hustle to the line, snap and sneak. We had them off balance.
However, once we called time out and allow their D to prepare for the next play a cooler head kicks the FG... THE 27-YD FG.... and force DNV to score a TD to win.
It's the smart play.
That's what I don't get. Kicking the FG is the smart play there, and it really doesn't seem that complicated to me. So they'd have to go 75 yards with just under 2 minutes, AND they'd have no timeouts? A running clock makes people do crazy things, like spike the ball at the 50 when they should've had a play ready to go, even if it's a 3 yard out route.
But hey, we won and our defense held. And it's sooo fun.
-
I know, that’s the fun part! Taking the road less traveled.
It's football, not the game of life there guy.
-
I know, that’s the fun part! Taking the road less traveled.
It's football, not the game of life there guy.
It's football, not the game of life there guy.
Right, it’s a game, with like 50 some people and their own personalities and motivations in the mix.
All we know for certain is the path they chose worked, and the path either of us chose? We don’t know. Because it wasn’t attempted at that point in time, with those set of people.
And the game of life is a terrible analogy. That’s an awful and boring game involving one person and their own motivations.
-
If you want to have a fun read, check out the twitter account of one Lt Baker Mayfield.
-
If you want to have a fun read, check out the twitter account of one Lt Baker Mayfield.
If you want to have a fun read, check out the twitter account of one Lt Baker Mayfield.
Baker "GX" Mayfield
-
If you want to have a fun read, check out the twitter account of one Lt Baker Mayfield.
Baker "GX" Mayfield
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login