<![CDATA[What the hell was that?]]>I don't understand the play calling before the second half. We go for a fake field goal to get the first down, and then the next play we go for the field goal? If we wouldn't of converted it would of been turnover on downs. What was the point of this? At least throw a strike at the endzone after that....

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/8803/what-the-hell-was-thatRSS for NodeThu, 01 Oct 2026 14:26:01 GMTMon, 23 Nov 2009 01:08:41 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:57:42 GMT]]>

@ledzepfan1 said:

I don't understand the play calling before the second half. We go for a fake field goal to get the first down, and then the next play we go for the field goal? If we wouldn't of converted it would of been turnover on downs. What was the point of this? At least throw a strike at the endzone after that....

I copied this from a Lion's board:

"Another unsung hero was Louis Delmas. Watch the replay of the fake field goal, which I'm sure the Browns figured was going for a TD. Delmas was the only one alert enough to recognize the possiblity and he looked over, saw Furrey alone on the sideline, and sprinted from the pack of players on the line of scrimmage over to the sideline just in time to knock him out of bounds and hold the Browns to a field goal. If that was six points, we may never have recovered."

http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2009/..._up_big_on.html

The call was a FANTASTIC one. From film study, the coaches noticed something and figured they could get an easy TD in that situation. The refs, again, did the Browns no favors. They took forever to spot the ball, giving Delma more time to figure this out. Dieken noticed it. He'll talk about it on "The Point After", I'll bet.

Good coaching, great call. Bad luck.

The one debatable thing is the use of Furrey in this and other situations where you are looking for yards after the catch. Even with Delma sniffing out the play, Furrey needs only to break one tackle and it is 6 points. And we had a TO, so he didn't need to get out of bounds on the play. Cribbs or even Stuckey would have been the better option. I really would rather see Robiskie getting time over Furrey. We know what Furrey is.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139635https://brownsboard.com/post/139635Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:57:42 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:33:39 GMT]]>Given that the season counts for nothing at this point, I was glad to see them trying a few new things in a game situation. It's not like we were risking home field advantage or a playoff spot.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139443https://brownsboard.com/post/139443Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:33:39 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:19:09 GMT]]>I agree with nmills that this is not a risk at 1-9. My take on what happened is this:

1) They saw something that made them think they might be able to win a 1-on-1 and score

2) The Browns anticipated more time being left in which case they could throw one into the endzone after having gotten a first and still have time to trot the FG team out if it didn't happened.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139373https://brownsboard.com/post/139373Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:19:09 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:13:40 GMT]]>

@blowe said:

It was idiotic in my opinion...so what if you don't convert there!? Turn over on downs and zero points. The risk was not worth the reward...idiotic

We're 1-9 was it really that big of a risk?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139371https://brownsboard.com/post/139371Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:13:40 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:09:34 GMT]]>It was idiotic in my opinion...so what if you don't convert there!? Turn over on downs and zero points. The risk was not worth the reward...idiotic

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139369https://brownsboard.com/post/139369Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:09:34 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:46:02 GMT]]>It makes sense.. Furry is supposed to beat his guy 1 on 1 and score a TD... That didn't work so .. kick the field goal. if there were a few more ticks on the clock we could have run one more play to the end zone before kicking...but it did not work out that way.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139359https://brownsboard.com/post/139359Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:46:02 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:23:51 GMT]]>

@arjuna74 said:

everyone seems to forget the dropped pass to Chris Jennings that would have been a TD on the play before.... and none of that fake FG stuff woulda mattered. Jennings will have nightmares tonight about that easy, gift-wrapped, perfect pass he dropped.

that should of been a TD. that was right in his hands!! perfect pass by quinn. hes gotta catch those.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139354https://brownsboard.com/post/139354Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:23:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:22:35 GMT]]>They thought they could score on it, plain and simple. After that, Mangie was pissed that the clock ran down to six seconds. Would have had time for another play with 8 seconds.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139353https://brownsboard.com/post/139353Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:22:35 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:21:36 GMT]]>everyone seems to forget the dropped pass to Chris Jennings that would have been a TD on the play before.... and none of that fake FG stuff woulda mattered. Jennings will have nightmares tonight about that easy, gift-wrapped, perfect pass he dropped.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139352https://brownsboard.com/post/139352Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:21:36 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:18:03 GMT]]>

nmills said:

I thought it was odd to when it first happened. THen I thought about it and maybe they saw something on a previous field goal attempt where they thought they could catch them off guard an actually score. But they didnt and with only 6 seconds left it was the right decision to kick the field goal and go into halftime with the lead

yeah but the route was no where near the endzone and dawson probably wouldn't be able to throw an accurate pass that far. As it turns out we should of thrown to the endzone because if we would of gotten the touchdown we would of won in the end.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139349https://brownsboard.com/post/139349Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:18:03 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to What the hell was that? on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:13:47 GMT]]>

@ledzepfan1 said:

I don't understand the play calling before the second half. We go for a fake field goal to get the first down, and then the next play we go for the field goal? If we wouldn't of converted it would of been turnover on downs. What was the point of this? At least throw a strike at the endzone after that....

I thought it was odd to when it first happened. THen I thought about it and maybe they saw something on a previous field goal attempt where they thought they could catch them off guard an actually score. But they didnt and with only 6 seconds left it was the right decision to kick the field goal and go into halftime with the lead

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/139347https://brownsboard.com/post/139347Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:13:47 GMT