BELLICHEK THE GENIUS.....Gone insane or Calculated ???

[Bretsky]

Many watched one of the great games of the season with the Patriots playing at Indy.

The media has torn Bill Bellichek, greatest NFL coach I've witnessed, to shreds in the past week.

Not sure I'd have had the stones to do it but........I AGREE WITH BILL BELLICHEK


Consider the circumstances

3rd and 2 at their own 29...incomplete pass
4th and 2 at their own 29

Do you go for the jugulars or do you punt ?

I SAY GO AND THIS IS WHY


ESPN reported under BB New England has converted 64% of their fourth down calls of 4th and 2 or more

Indianapolis had went down for two straight TD's with the ease that reminded me of the Vanilla Bob Days

Payton Manning was 7 or 8 for 101 yards and two TD's in the past two drives
The New England Patriots Defense was winded


Bellichek played the odds but it just didn't work. Consider this.

If there is say, a 60% chance that NE converts on the first down...odds are they will run the time down or out and win

If they fail, my guess is there is about a 90% chance Payton Manning drives his team 29 yards for the win, as he did.

Let's say they punt and give Manning the ball with 65 yards to go and a couple timeouts for the win.

I'd say his odds of putting the dagger in New England himself are at least 50% and if you were watching the game and feeling the momentum turn one might argue 75%.

So which do you choose ????????????????///


What Bill Bellichek did was show us he had stones in trying to win with his team's strength
He made the right call but it just didn't work.

EXACT OPPOSITE OF MIKE SHERMAN on 4th and 1 Versus Phily in the Playoffs in puting the game in the hands of the weaker side of the ball

[Bretsky]

I will say this

Bellichek knew he was going for it on 4th and 2

With that being the case, his mistake was not running on 3rd and two to give his squad better odds at converting if they didn't make the first down on that down

[retailguy]

I will say this

Bellichek knew he was going for it on 4th and 2

With that being the case, his mistake was not running on 3rd and two to give his squad better odds at converting if they didn't make the first down on that down

the real question is what would ted do? mccrappy woulda ordered a pizza, and then punted.

[Lurker64]

Well, what the Pats were attempting to do in that situation amounted to approximately a 2 point conversion, as the Colts had only one time out and the Pats would have been able to run out the clock. Historically, teams at the 30 yard line with 2 minutes to go needing a TD to tie or win get it approximately 53% of the time (though this could be higher for the Colts offense). The NFL percentages for completing a 2 point conversion (which is basically what the Pats wanted to do) is right around 45%.

So by going for it, the Pats have a winning percentage of:

(0.45 * 1) + (0.55 * (1-0.53)) = .7085

A punt from the 28 yard line typically nets about 38 yards, which would leave the Colts at their own 34. So the question really comes down to "Are the Colts chances of driving 66 yards in two minutes with one time out and scoring a TD better than .2915."

Personally, I would have punted.

[mraynrand]

I would have punted and then on 4th and 26, I would have blitzed instead of playing off in quarters.

[The Leaper]

It was a very stupid decision IMO...because of one key reason that few discuss.

Everyone says that the Pats win if they convert...but that is NOT true. The Colts still had all 3 timeouts plus the 2 minute warning...so the Pats would have to get ANOTHER first down to actually take a knee and win.

In other words...you MAKE the 4th and 2. Now the 2 minute warning hits and it is 1st and 10 at your own 30. You run 3 plays and the Colts call 3 timeouts. Now there is 1:45 on the clock, and it is 4th down again.

I agree with Belichick's call IF and ONLY IF the conversion is more or less the end of the game...i.e. you are able to run out the clock by taking knees. In this case, converting the fourth down did not mean the game was over. You still faced the potential of giving the ball back to Manning, albeit without the timeouts.

So, in that position, I punt every time without question...because the risk is not worth the reward.

[gex]

Against any other team a punt would have been the right decision, But like Bretsky said the way Manning walked down the field the last 2 drives, I think going for it was an ok decision.
Summary = any other team-punt, Peyton Manning led team - go for it.

[pbmax]

The media has torn Bill Bellichek, greatest NFL coach I've witnessed, to shreds in the past week.
Bill Walsh, Don Shula, Chuck Noll, Tom Landry, Joe Gibbs, Bill Parcells. At least Walsh had the decency to look like he knew what he was doing when he drafted Montana in the 3rd round. Not even Belicheck can claim to have valued Brady that much by getting him in the 6th. That is a good deal of luck. They were terrible with Bledsoe under Belicheck. :lol:

But there is also the matter of wasting a timeout before first down of this drive. If we are going to harpoon McCarthy because of the failed challenge on Nelson, then Belicheck deserves to be knocked as well. His QB called his timeout for the same reason McCarthy said he was going to call timeout before the Nelson challenge. It could have come in VERY handy with only a slight variation in the outcome of his 4th down call OR when the Pats got the ball back down by one. Belicheck's error was more egregious in some ways, as his Offense was ill prepared coming out of a change of possession timeout. At least McCarthy was waiting for a coaching booth call on the challenge.

ESPN reported under BB New England has converted 64% of their fourth down calls of 4th and 2 or more
Not all of those chances came against the Colts' defense.

Let's say they punt and give Manning the ball with 65 yards to go and a couple timeouts for the win.
Indianapolis had only one timeout left. Had NE run on 3rd down, they leave Indy with no 2:00 warning or no timeouts. If Indy is smart, they call a TO fast after the run (assume there is no first down) with about 2:05 on the clock. After the kick, Indy is going 65 yards with no timeouts and no two minute warning.[/quote]


EXACT OPPOSITE OF MIKE SHERMAN on 4th and 1 Versus Phily in the Playoffs in puting the game in the hands of the weaker side of the ball
Sherman had seen 4th and 1 not work earlier in the game. That had to have some bearing on his decision. Belicheck had not been in this spot in this game.

[digitaldean]

At first glance or to anyone who wasn't watching the previous Colt drives, Bellcheck's move looked unwarranted at best.

He must have seen that his D was gassed and couldn't stop Manning from 79 yards away, let alone 29 yards.

He rolled the dice and it came up snake eyes. If they would have made that and eventually ran out the clock somehow, we'd be hearing about the genius of that move.

As of now, some people are treating him like Elmer Fudd.

[Bretsky]

It was a very stupid decision IMO...because of one key reason that few discuss.

Everyone says that the Pats win if they convert...but that is NOT true. The Colts still had all 3 timeouts plus the 2 minute warning...so the Pats would have to get ANOTHER first down to actually take a knee and win.

In other words...you MAKE the 4th and 2. Now the 2 minute warning hits and it is 1st and 10 at your own 30. You run 3 plays and the Colts call 3 timeouts. Now there is 1:45 on the clock, and it is 4th down again.

I agree with Belichick's call IF and ONLY IF the conversion is more or less the end of the game...i.e. you are able to run out the clock by taking knees. In this case, converting the fourth down did not mean the game was over. You still faced the potential of giving the ball back to Manning, albeit without the timeouts.

So, in that position, I punt every time without question...because the risk is not worth the reward.


Unless my memory is wrong they did not have three TO's left

[Guiness]

one way or the other, the media, who he's been flat out nasty to, has had a field day panning him for this!

[pbmax]

The Colts had one timeout left and while I have not been as dialed into Sport Talk radio as usual this week, what I have heard has been 60/40 too smart for his own good/right call. I don't think the condemnation is universal, but its an easy column because the distance between turning the ball over and the Colts scoring is just a few plays. Plus it goes against conventional wisdom, so the column writes itself.

[Pugger]

If any other coach besides BB had done this he would've been blasted big time. But because Belichick has been so successful he gets a pass by most. I had to laugh watching BSPN earlier on Wednesday night. They were saying how the Patriot players weren't saying anything negative about their coach's decision but what NE is gonna say anything negative about his HC?? :roll:

[gex]

http://www.fantasyindex.com/content_sections/display_entry/1927



When Bill Belichick's gamble at the end of the Patriots/Colts game didn't pan out for New England, I could see what was coming next. I don't mean Peyton Manning's pass to Reggie Wayne, although that wasn't surprising. I don't even mean the Colts' excellent use of clock management, which was very different than the Buccaneers' poor use of the clock that gave the Dolphins a chance to win. I expect good teams to use good strategies (and poor teams to use poor ones).

No, when Kevin Faulk bobbled a pass that couldn't be challenged, I knew the commentators were lining up to attack the decision. And after the game, when the Colts had kept their record perfect and New England looked suddenly flawed, every talking head did what they do best: use 20/20 hindsight to earn their paycheck. Everyone knew you have to punt in that situation. It made no sense to risk the game like that. You have to show confidence in your defense, you have to lengthen the field for Manning and you have to make them drive for the winning score. Conventional wisdom was nearly unanimous, and everyone knew what Belichick should have done.

And the more I heard people say what a bad decision it was, the more it seemed like a pretty good move. If everyone thinks you have to do something, it's often a good time to consider doing something else. How many of Belichick's critics would have praised his "gutsy call" if it had paid off?

Going for fourth down wasn't a bad call. Punting wouldn't have been a bad call, either. If you're the type to play it safe, you punt. If you're the type to grab the brass ring, you go for it. Tony Dungy is the type of coach who would punt, so I don't fault him for his criticism. Even if it paid off I think Dungy would have criticized the call. But Belichick is different, and he went for it. Either way, you have to live with your decision.

[channtheman]

edit.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I agree with Bretsky and Belichick.

That move wouldn't even have occurred to most head coaches. The guy thinks out of the box.

I remember the Packers' Super Bowl loss to Denver. At the end John Elway was walking the Broncos down the field for the winning touchdown, threatening to leave no time left for Favre and the Pack to come back. Packers couldn't stop Davis all day, so I was screaming for the Packers' defense to step out of the way and let the Broncos score with two minutes left. I pissed off a lot of relatives, but it turns out Holmgren was telling his players to let the Broncos score too.

[bobblehead]

This move reminds me of Spurrier trying to coach in the NFL. You do this kind of move when you clearly have superior talent therefore you don't have to do it.

It was a move born of arrogance. We all saw the effect of a much shorter field on our defense in weeks past right? We have all seen what happens when a DLine gets to ignore the run (which NE would have if they punt).

Sorry, this was a horrible call. Bellicheat has gotten too arrogant. and it showed up big time. He got too confident in the QB that has turned him from a run of the mill losing coach into the genius.

When BB goes on to win in another city with a QB not named Brady I'll start saying this call was ok and he is brilliant...until then, he is nothing more than Tom Brady's steward.

[ThunderDan]

The problem I have with the decision is that a Holding or a Motion penalty could have stopped any Colts drive.

Other than that I really don't care one way or the other. I mean this NE team is an offensive team not a defensive powerhouse.

[Smidgeon]

When BB goes on to win in another city with a QB not named Brady I'll start saying this call was ok and he is brilliant...until then, he is nothing more than Tom Brady's steward.

Not advocating BB, but how do you characterize the season with Matt Cassel starting?

[mraynrand]

This move reminds me of Spurrier trying to coach in the NFL. You do this kind of move when you clearly have superior talent therefore you don't have to do it.

It was a move born of arrogance. We all saw the effect of a much shorter field on our defense in weeks past right? We have all seen what happens when a DLine gets to ignore the run (which NE would have if they punt).

Sorry, this was a horrible call. Bellicheat has gotten too arrogant. and it showed up big time. He got too confident in the QB that has turned him from a run of the mill losing coach into the genius.

When BB goes on to win in another city with a QB not named Brady I'll start saying this call was ok and he is brilliant...until then, he is nothing more than Tom Brady's steward.

Wow, what an over-reaction. Sure, Tom Brady shut down all those multiple offenses, like The '91 Bills or the 2001 Rams, or the Colts multiple times. Bill's just a hack, hanging on Brady's apron strings.

But let's assume your thinking is correct, and Brady is the entire reason for Bill's success: then it makes total sense to let Brady make the play and win the game right? Let's see - my choices are to punt and have a run of the mill losing coach try to instruct his defense to stop Manning or let the QB who turned this loser into a genius win the game. Bobbly, you argued in favor of what Bill ended up doing.

[bobblehead]

When BB goes on to win in another city with a QB not named Brady I'll start saying this call was ok and he is brilliant...until then, he is nothing more than Tom Brady's steward.

Not advocating BB, but how do you characterize the season with Matt Cassel starting?

Excellent point, I must give him a bit more credit. Not too much though. Remember this guy was a D coordinator for like 150 years before he landed a top gig.

Although I did qualify by saying in another city. NE has a strong winning tradition now and is confident and stacked....although that confidence might just be a bit shaken now.

[bobblehead]

This move reminds me of Spurrier trying to coach in the NFL. You do this kind of move when you clearly have superior talent therefore you don't have to do it.

It was a move born of arrogance. We all saw the effect of a much shorter field on our defense in weeks past right? We have all seen what happens when a DLine gets to ignore the run (which NE would have if they punt).

Sorry, this was a horrible call. Bellicheat has gotten too arrogant. and it showed up big time. He got too confident in the QB that has turned him from a run of the mill losing coach into the genius.

When BB goes on to win in another city with a QB not named Brady I'll start saying this call was ok and he is brilliant...until then, he is nothing more than Tom Brady's steward.

Wow, what an over-reaction. Sure, Tom Brady shut down all those multiple offenses, like The '91 Bills or the 2001 Rams, or the Colts multiple times. Bill's just a hack, hanging on Brady's apron strings.

But let's assume your thinking is correct, and Brady is the entire reason for Bill's success: then it makes total sense to let Brady make the play and win the game right? Let's see - my choices are to punt and have a run of the mill losing coach try to instruct his defense to stop Manning or let the QB who turned this loser into a genius win the game. Bobbly, you argued in favor of what Bill ended up doing.

I guess the simple answer is that he was stealing signals and knew what he was trying to stop therefore it wasn't quite as complex as it seemed.

[mraynrand]

If you are saying you think Belichick is a slimy guy and you don't like him, well, then I agree with you.

[bobblehead]

If you are saying you think Belichick is a slimy guy and you don't like him, well, then I agree with you.

I am also saying he is overrated. He is a proven cheater which puts all his accomplishments with NE into question, and he flopped as a head coach in Cleveland.

I'm not saying he is SHITTY, I'm saying overrated. I would never put him in the same league as guys like Holmgren, Parcells, Walsh. If he leaves NE and makes a Superbowl (or even an Conference championship) I'll reconsider.

[mraynrand]

If you are saying you think Belichick is a slimy guy and you don't like him, well, then I agree with you.

I am also saying he is overrated. He is a proven cheater which puts all his accomplishments with NE into question, and he flopped as a head coach in Cleveland.

I'm not saying he is SHITTY, I'm saying overrated. I would never put him in the same league as guys like Holmgren, Parcells, Walsh. If he leaves NE and makes a Superbowl (or even an Conference championship) I'll reconsider.

Interesting that Parcells never really won anything without Belichick. Flopped as head coach in Cleveland? Cleveland last won a playoff game in 1994 under Bill. If you recall, they moved after the '95 season and played under a cloud the entire '95 season. Was that Bill's fault? The Patriots obviously thought he was worth a first round draft pick. Without knowing exactly what the advantage the cheating really provided, it's hard to really assess the guy. But based on results, he's clearly in the top 10 to top 5 all time NFL coaches.

[Smidgeon]

When BB goes on to win in another city with a QB not named Brady I'll start saying this call was ok and he is brilliant...until then, he is nothing more than Tom Brady's steward.

Not advocating BB, but how do you characterize the season with Matt Cassel starting?

Excellent point, I must give him a bit more credit. Not too much though. Remember this guy was a D coordinator for like 150 years before he landed a top gig.

Although I did qualify by saying in another city. NE has a strong winning tradition now and is confident and stacked....although that confidence might just be a bit shaken now.

I know you said "different city", but you also said he was hanging on Brady's strings. Brady was out that year. How many other teams would be able to go 11-5 with a backup QB? I would surmise very few.

EDIT: Also, I don't remember the exact number, but when Holmgren made it to the Super Bowl with Seattle, there was a big who-do about that because so very few coaches (maybe he was the first) have made it to Super Bowls with more than one team.

[Guiness]

I know you said "different city", but you also said he was hanging on Brady's strings. Brady was out that year. How many other teams would be able to go 11-5 with a backup QB? I would surmise very few.

EDIT: Also, I don't remember the exact number, but when Holmgren made it to the Super Bowl with Seattle, there was a big who-do about that because so very few coaches (maybe he was the first) have made it to Super Bowls with more than one team.

Vermeil did it with Philly and St-L. Was oh-so-close to going with a third team, he had some good squads in Kansas City.

[Smidgeon]

I know you said "different city", but you also said he was hanging on Brady's strings. Brady was out that year. How many other teams would be able to go 11-5 with a backup QB? I would surmise very few.

EDIT: Also, I don't remember the exact number, but when Holmgren made it to the Super Bowl with Seattle, there was a big who-do about that because so very few coaches (maybe he was the first) have made it to Super Bowls with more than one team.

Vermeil did it with Philly and St-L. Was oh-so-close to going with a third team, he had some good squads in Kansas City.

Thanks for the info. Unless the announcers were wrong, no HC has won with two teams.

[packers11]

Imagine if Wade Phillips did it... or Even MM... :shock:

People would be calling for their heads

[Fritz]

I would've gone for the field goal.

[Bretsky]

I agree with Bretsky and Belichick.

That move wouldn't even have occurred to most head coaches. The guy thinks out of the box.

I remember the Packers' Super Bowl loss to Denver. At the end John Elway was walking the Broncos down the field for the winning touchdown, threatening to leave no time left for Favre and the Pack to come back. Packers couldn't stop Davis all day, so I was screaming for the Packers' defense to step out of the way and let the Broncos score with two minutes left. I pissed off a lot of relatives, but it turns out Holmgren was telling his players to let the Broncos score too.


BINGO, and if Faulk makes the play he's suppose to make we're not even debating this

[Bretsky]

If you are saying you think Belichick is a slimy guy and you don't like him, well, then I agree with you.

I am also saying he is overrated. He is a proven cheater which puts all his accomplishments with NE into question, and he flopped as a head coach in Cleveland.

I'm not saying he is SHITTY, I'm saying overrated. I would never put him in the same league as guys like Holmgren, Parcells, Walsh. If he leaves NE and makes a Superbowl (or even an Conference championship) I'll reconsider.

Interesting that Parcells never really won anything without Belichick. Flopped as head coach in Cleveland? Cleveland last won a playoff game in 1994 under Bill. If you recall, they moved after the '95 season and played under a cloud the entire '95 season. Was that Bill's fault? The Patriots obviously thought he was worth a first round draft pick. Without knowing exactly what the advantage the cheating really provided, it's hard to really assess the guy. But based on results, he's clearly in the top 10 to top 5 all time NFL coaches.


Ditto again; hard to call BB a flop in Cleveland when you consider the circumstances. He's the best

[pbmax]

I agree with Bretsky and Belichick.

That move wouldn't even have occurred to most head coaches. The guy thinks out of the box.

I remember the Packers' Super Bowl loss to Denver. At the end John Elway was walking the Broncos down the field for the winning touchdown, threatening to leave no time left for Favre and the Pack to come back. Packers couldn't stop Davis all day, so I was screaming for the Packers' defense to step out of the way and let the Broncos score with two minutes left. I pissed off a lot of relatives, but it turns out Holmgren was telling his players to let the Broncos score too.


BINGO, and if Faulk makes the play he's suppose to make we're not even debating this
Faulk had a tough catch in traffic and was getting hit. That is not so easy.

Also, didn't Holmgren later recant and said if he knew it was second down, he would not have told the defense to let Davis score.

[Bretsky]

I agree with Bretsky and Belichick.

That move wouldn't even have occurred to most head coaches. The guy thinks out of the box.

I remember the Packers' Super Bowl loss to Denver. At the end John Elway was walking the Broncos down the field for the winning touchdown, threatening to leave no time left for Favre and the Pack to come back. Packers couldn't stop Davis all day, so I was screaming for the Packers' defense to step out of the way and let the Broncos score with two minutes left. I pissed off a lot of relatives, but it turns out Holmgren was telling his players to let the Broncos score too.


Traffic...yes...but Faulk had a second to catch it clean before he was hit. That's a play he makes nearly every time.

BB's mistake was not running on 3rd and 2


BINGO, and if Faulk makes the play he's suppose to make we're not even debating this
Faulk had a tough catch in traffic and was getting hit. That is not so easy.

Also, didn't Holmgren later recant and said if he knew it was second down, he would not have told the defense to let Davis score.