Sign in to follow this  
SirLanceALot

Vrabel Needs To Go

Recommended Posts

In the post game he said that challenging would’ve been futile. He said that ball spots almost never get changed when challenged. It’s too subjective. I kind of buy his reasoning but at such a critical juncture you might want to roll the dice on that.

 

I was more pissed off that he prevented a 10 second run off at the end by calling a timeout. The very next play there was another 10 second run off and we could’ve basically had them on their last play. He got bailed out by Casey and woodyard. But there’s no way we march down and score a touchdown with 15 seconds left. You go all out for a goal line stand there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Thrill said:

In the post game he said that challenging would’ve been futile. He said that ball spots almost never get changed when challenged. It’s too subjective. I kind of buy his reasoning but at such a critical juncture you might want to roll the dice on that.

 

I was more pissed off that he prevented a 10 second run off at the end by calling a timeout. The very next play there was another 10 second run off and we could’ve basically had them on their last play. He got bailed out by Casey and woodyard. But there’s no way we march down and score a touchdown with 15 seconds left. You go all out for a goal line stand there.

It was all Simmons. I’m not disagreeing with you except to note that last play was Simmons blowing up the center.

Edited by IsntLifeFunny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

It was all Simmons. I’m not disagreeing with you except to note that last play was Simmons blowing up the center.

Yes him too. Studmuffin 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll only overturn on a spot challenge if it's an egregious error and that will usually only show up on an out of bounds spot. I don't remember ever seeing a middle of the field scrum spot get overturned in a pro game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, No1TitansFan said:

They'll only overturn on a spot challenge if it's an egregious error and that will usually only show up on an out of bounds spot. I don't remember ever seeing a middle of the field scrum spot get overturned in a pro game.

I have one time and it was Whisenhunt that won the spot challenge. 
 

on a QB sneak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posters on here hated that he challenged the spot bc of the reason Vrabel gave today. 
 

the thing I don’t agree with was preventing the run off. 
 

The challenge I understand. He is a damn good coach and is still learning. He is learning with the team and the team bailed him out today. He owes them. They know it. They bailed him out bc they love playing for him. 
 

It’s one of those problems you never want to see again from him, but also know that you’ll never be in a situation like that again and if for some reason you are, I highly doubt he will make that error again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree he should have challenged the spot....and he had the flag in his hand, so he was clearly considering it.   Converting that first down effectively ends the game...and with all three time-outs in his pocket,  he had very little to lose.   Sure, it was a long shot....but the potential reward justified the risk, IMO.

 

Vrabel has caught a lot of heat for going for it on 4th down.....but I think going for it was the correct decision.   I know a lot of folks feel he should have punted and forced the Chargers to go the length of the field.....but the fact is, the defense was struggling badly in the fourth quarter as the Chargers were moving the ball at will through the air.    The Chargers' two previous possessions were a 6-play 50+ yard drive for a FG and a 75-yard TD drive that took only four plays....so it was hardly a slam-dunk to assume the defense would hold them.

 

Any doubts Vrabel might have had in the defense were quickly validated as Chargers once again drove 50 yards down to the one-yard line in only six plays.   The goal-line stand was obviously tremendous and legendary....but it helped everyone overlook the fact that the defense was absolutely shredded by the passing game in the fourth quarter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, WG53 said:

Honestly, I don't remember who all was available in that coaching change cycle. I do know that I think we need a more offensive minded coach. But one that will have a good DC with him. Unlikely we get Pees if we didn't get Vrabel. I was against the idea of McDaniels at the time.

 

As far as the future goes at some point Lincoln Reilly is going to get a shot in the pros. I'm also keeping an eye on Leftwich and Kris Richards. Although Richards is a defensive guy. I'm not saying we should necessarily hire these but they do intrigue me.

 

 

I wasn't high on Lafluer or McDaniels, but knowing what we know now, Frank Reich should have been higher on the list.  

 

I also like Reilly, but I think we are stuck with Vrabel unless we miss the playoffs this year and next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The replay clearly showed the spot was wrong, they actually had him losing yards. The refs def move the ball up and the respot. 

 

There is a greater chance they are winning with the replay then getting the ball back after a SD score and winning 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, OILERMAN said:

The replay clearly showed the spot was wrong, they actually had him losing yards. The refs def move the ball up and the respot. 

 

There is a greater chance they are winning with the replay then getting the ball back after a SD score and winning 

But the replay angle was not down the line. They wouldn’t have overturned. 
 

He still should have attempted in my opinion. 

Edited by japan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, OILERMAN said:

The replay clearly showed the spot was wrong, they actually had him losing yards. The refs def move the ball up and the respot. 

 

There is a greater chance they are winning with the replay then getting the ball back after a SD score and winning 

The tv angle means there’s no way they overturn it. I believe spot challenges had an 8/9% success rate either last year or the year before and most of those are out of bounds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, OILERMAN said:

Also totally exposed starting Mariota the 1st 6 weeks

 

I agree he's made some bad calls. REALLY should have challenged the spot on the Tanny sneak. But starting Mariota wasn't a bad call. He had to in week one. He's all over the programs. Then, we win...then a couple of bad games. Then we win again. Hard to pull your starting QB at 2-2, really. But then...2 in a row where the guy just wouldn't throw the ball, and it cost us games. Had to pull him and finally had enough reason that almost anyone could see it.

 

There's almost no way he could have played Tanny from the start, even if he considered it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Alcibiades said:

 

I agree he's made some bad calls. REALLY should have challenged the spot on the Tanny sneak. But starting Mariota wasn't a bad call. He had to in week one. He's all over the programs. Then, we win...then a couple of bad games. Then we win again. Hard to pull your starting QB at 2-2, really. But then...2 in a row where the guy just wouldn't throw the ball, and it cost us games. Had to pull him and finally had enough reason that almost anyone could see it.

 

There's almost no way he could have played Tanny from the start, even if he considered it.

 

If this is true then this team has no interest in winning on the field.

 

He's on the programs......lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, OILERMAN said:

 

If this is true then this team has no interest in winning on the field.

 

He's on the programs......lol

 

You know what I mean by that. I mean the person paying Vrabel wanted to see Mariota succeed. Being on the programs shouldn't matter, but it does, and you know it.

 

Every team wants to win, but they also want to make money. It sucks that in this case, those two interests were in conflict, but they were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.