Denny Green is a sore loser(video from post game)

[Little Whiskey]

now maybe the national media will take chicago's dick out of their mouth!! if you watched any of the pregame you'd have thought they might as well size them up for their rings now. even better was the crow micheal irving must be eating after saying that the cards have no chance and shouldn't even suit up for the game. idiot!!

[Tarlam!]

He's been watching German soccer interviews. This stuff was made famous by an Italian coach here about a decade ago.

I loved the interview. It's like replacing the Goalie in hockey - a huge insult to the players. I remember in a world cup a few years back when Finland was beating Sweden by 4 goals or something ridiculous.

Coach replaces the goalie and te Swedes rallied and won. I was with a Fin at the time, he knew when they took out the goalie, the game would turn.

Green just replaced the goalie....Let's see what happens....

[BooHoo]

I thought the birds had it won. Denny thought so to. He was probably looking ahead for the the post game interviews and the week of feeling like winners. At the last minutes they lose the game. I was impressed with the birds QB Matt. He played well, especially for a rookie.

[ahaha]

The Cardinals have choked BAD in three games now. In week three, Warner fumbled at the Rams 18 yd line with under two minutes to go and down by two points. Last week they gave up an early 14 pt lead and a 10 pt lead going into the fourth quarter, and then missed a 51 yd FG to tie at the end of the game. And of course, last night's supreme choke job.
It's perfectly understandable why Green would be so pissed at last night's news conference. His team should be 4-2, and instead they're 1-5 and Green is in real danger of losing his job at the end of the season.

[swede]

I went to bed after Anderson had stripped Leinert and chicago scored (My God that Anderson is a beast! I'm so envious.) and AZ and da bears had exchanged 3 and outs with time down to about 10 minutes. I thought da bears had blown their last chance to pull the game out down 10-23 with 10 minutes left and back on D.

I have a hard time being a Bear hater this year. What's gotten into me?

I think it's because they are so much better than us right now that the rivalry thing is temporarily not as meaningful. I'll get my hate back on a little closer to Christmas-time though.

Didn't see the Green interview but he would have been better off straight losing big to Chicago than blowing a big lead like that.

[ahaha]

Something else that really bothered me during last night's game.

2-3-CHI24 (1:04) E.James left tackle to CHI 22 for 2 yards (A.Boone).
3-1-CHI22 (:58) E.James up the middle to CHI 23 for -1 yards (I.Idonije).

The Cardinals had marched down the field through the passing game and still had a minute left at Chicago's 24. Instead of trying a few more short passes to set up a "gimmie" field goal, Green decides to go into "completely conservative" mode. He decides to give the ball to the run game, which had been so overwhelmingly AWFUL in the second half. Predictably, they get one yard on two plays and settle for a 40 yd attempt. I was screaming at the T.V. that you can't COUNT on a kicker to make a game winning FG from 35 or more yards, especially after he'd missed one earlier in the game.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Something else that really bothered me during last night's game.

2-3-CHI24 (1:04) E.James left tackle to CHI 22 for 2 yards (A.Boone).
3-1-CHI22 (:58) E.James up the middle to CHI 23 for -1 yards (I.Idonije).

The Cardinals had marched down the field through the passing game and still had a minute left at Chicago's 24. Instead of trying a few more short passes to set up a "gimmie" field goal, Green decides to go into "completely conservative" mode. He decides to give the ball to the run game, which had been so overwhelmingly AWFUL in the second half. Predictably, they get one yard on two plays and settle for a 40 yd attempt. I was screaming at the T.V. that you can't COUNT on a kicker to make a game winning FG from 35 or more yards, especially after he'd missed one earlier in the game.

ahaha,

No doubt. It's one of biggest pet peeves in football. When you are still at the 25 yard line, you have to try to get more yards. Hasn't anybody learned from Marty Schottenheimer?

[Patler]

I was kind of torn between run and pass myself at that point, especially on third down. The second down run might have caught somone flat footed, thinking a fake run and quick pass. It kept the clock running and did net two yards. But the third down fooled no one. They merely conceded the down to use up whatever time they could.

On the other hand, last year Rackers was 10 for 10 from 30-39 yards, and 13 of 14 from 40-49 yards. The 40 yarder should have been a "gimme" for him. His other miss last night was a 52 yard attempt. He choked under the pressure. It was a very makeable fieldgoal.

[ahaha]

I was kind of torn between run and pass myself at that point, especially on third down. The second down run might have caught somone flat footed, thinking a fake run and quick pass. It kept the clock running and did net two yards. But the third down fooled no one. They merely conceded the down to use up whatever time they could.

On the other hand, last year Rackers was 10 for 10 from 30-39 yards, and 13 of 14 from 40-49 yards. The 40 yarder should have been a "gimme" for him. His other miss last night was a 52 yard attempt. He choked under the pressure. It was a very makeable fieldgoal.

A 40 yd FG is usually a "gimmie", but not when it's a game winner. Coaches in this situation, a lot of times, become way too paranoid of a turnover. But, the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down. The quarterback knows that if the receivers aren't open or if there is pressure he can throw it out of the end zone.

[Patler]

Coaches in this situation, a lot of times, become way too paranoid of a turnover. But, the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down. The quarterback knows that if the receivers aren't open or if there is pressure he can throw it out of the end zone.

Well, after having just given up two touchdowns directly on turnovers, I would be a little paranoid too. With an agressive defense like Chicago, a good pass rush like Chicago, great linebacker play like Chicago and a rookie QB; I'm not sure I agree that "the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down."

[HarveyWallbangers]

On the other hand, last year Rackers was 10 for 10 from 30-39 yards, and 13 of 14 from 40-49 yards. The 40 yarder should have been a "gimme" for him. His other miss last night was a 52 yard attempt. He choked under the pressure. It was a very makeable fieldgoal.

Rackers missed a 51 yarder last week that would have sent them to OT--which is makeable for someone who is 9 of 14 in his career from 50+. Knowing that, wouldn't the coach want to get him as close as he could. Hell, there was enough time to get him inside 30 yard range.

[ahaha]

Coaches in this situation, a lot of times, become way too paranoid of a turnover. But, the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down. The quarterback knows that if the receivers aren't open or if there is pressure he can throw it out of the end zone.

Well, after having just given up two touchdowns directly on turnovers, I would be a little paranoid too. With an agressive defense like Chicago, a good pass rush like Chicago, great linebacker play like Chicago and a rookie QB; I'm not sure I agree that "the odds of a turnover in this situation go way down."

The odds go down because the quarterback doesn't have to make a play. He doesn't need to force a ball into coverage, and if there's pressure he can throw it away with ease. Plus, James had already fumbled in the same situation. They were trying to salt the game away with the running game when James got stacked up, and two Bears combined to rip it out of his grasp. Turnovers can happen on any play in the game. Coaches can't let that stop them from increasing their chances of winning. Just make sure the quarterback knows the situation and plays smart.

[Patler]

The odds go down because the quarterback doesn't have to make a play. He doesn't need to force a ball into coverage, and if there's pressure he can throw it away with ease. Plus, James had already fumbled in the same situation. They were trying to salt the game away with the running game when James got stacked up, and two Bears combined to rip it out of his grasp. Turnovers can happen on any play in the game. Coaches can't let that stop them from increasing their chances of winning. Just make sure the quarterback knows the situation and plays smart.

As I wrote early, the run on second down did not bother me, but I would like to have seen a pass on 3rd down. Even so, I can't really fault Green's thinking too much, passes run a lot of risks.

If the QB doesn't even have a chance to throw it away, gets blasted and fumbles before he can set up as Leinart had earlier, or has the ball slapped from his hand as Favre did a week ago, a pass play can go awry even without an interception. Or, the rookie QB can misread a defense or coverage and throw an interception. Leinert also had several passes tipped last night, so a safe throw to a wide open receiver can quickly become a tipped interception too. Finally, a sack moves you into even more precarious fieldgoal territory.

Putting the game in the hands (or feet!) of a veteran fieldgoal kicker for a relatively short 40 yarder SHOULD be a fairly safe thing. No comparison between the 40 yarder last night, and a 52 yarder the week before. Anything over 50 yards is not much more than a 50-50 proposition, regardless. A miss from 40 yards by a strong and reliable kicker is an oddity.

If he had called a pass, and Leinert fumbled, threw an interception or was sacked making it a 47 or 48 yard missed attempt, Green would now be called an idiot for giving up the "sure thing" on a 40 yard field goal.

[ahaha]

I like arguing with you Patler. You're very respectful and make good points supported with convicing examples.
Either way, Green could be second guessed if they lose. It's an age old argument on whether to be conservative or aggresive in this situation and both sides can show examples of why they're right. Mine would be Shottenheimer's play-off loss to the Jets a few years back, and the Packers loss to the Bears in '00 or '01, I can't remember exactly. Mistakes happen, and Rackers should have made that field goal. To me it comes down to odds. I'd rather they try to pass for more yards, while stressing to Leinert that he doesn't have to make a play, and if the short pass isn't there right away, just throw it away. To me, the odds in that situation, are better than running, which had already proved to be futile, and relying on a kicker to hit a 40yd game winner.

[Patler]

I like arguing with you Patler. You're very respectful and make good points supported with convicing examples.
Either way, Green could be second guessed if they lose. It's an age old argument on whether to be conservative or aggresive in this situation and both sides can show examples of why they're right. Mine would be Shottenheimer's play-off loss to the Jets a few years back, and the Packers loss to the Bears in '00 or '01, I can't remember exactly. Mistakes happen, and Rackers should have made that field goal. To me it comes down to odds. I'd rather they try to pass for more yards, while stressing to Leinert that he doesn't have to make a play, and if the short pass isn't there right away, just throw it away. To me, the odds in that situation, are better than running, which had already proved to be futile, and relying on a kicker to hit a 40yd game winner.

I don't disagree, actually. However, I don't think the second down run was a completely bad call under the circumstances. I believe they had passed every down in the drive so far, and it could have crossed up the Bears and picked up a first down. They didn't need a long run, just three yards, and at first I thought they might get it. But, the run on third down was "giving up" in a way. I would like to have seen a pass in that situation, if only because the aggressive call might have caught the Bears off guard enough to complete the pass for a 1st down, especially with playaction.

But, as you noted, the fact that they lost made second guessing a certainty. If the fieldgoal was made, nothing would be said.

I guess I don't look at a 40 yard FG as that big of a risk. To me it really isn't much less makable than a 35 yarder, but is a much greater certainty than a 45 yarder, for example. It seems as if the percentages change at around 43-45 yards and beyond.

It's amazing that it came down to that. Two defensive TDs and a punt return TD, all in the same game to get a 1 point lead when the offense can't score a TD. Pretty amazing.