Originally Posted by Lilmrp117:
First, thank you for your intelligent reply as opposed to Mega's very insightful "stupid" comment.
Second, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on whether this philosophy of Andy's is a feature or bug. There are certain situations where you need to be both smart and quick at the same time, and if you fail to do one or the other, then you lose. If Andy cannot get effective plays in quickly enough, especially when I've witnessed other coaches be able to do it (Belichick has used an array of speeds from slow to quick no-huddle to his advantage many times), then to me that's a flaw compared to other great coaches. Calling an effective play and getting a play off quickly are not two mutually exclusive things. This is what andy fails to realize and what other great coaches have been able to do successfully.
Wouldn't you agree that it gives your team an advantage if you can get effective plays called in and do it quickly at the same time? I'm not saying it's easy to do, otherwise belichick and other great coaches wouldn't be so special, but it certainly can be done and has been by other great coaches.
When you have the ball on offense, you can dictate the pace and manipulate the clock to your advantage. Andy basically forfeits this important tool every game with his backwards philosophy. For example, the chargers loss last year where he could have ran more clock and left the chargers with less time to come back. However, Andy, either because his plays are too complicated and he needed a stop to figure things out or because his players needed to "calm down", had to stop the clock to get the right play in.
I'm not looking to be contrarian on Reid. I've witnessed his philosophy bite him in the ass numerous times over 2 decades. Like I said, I think we can win a super bowl despite it, but historically, he has not had good luck in finishing a season with a super bowl with his philosophy. The history seems to be on my side in this debate and I think common sense is as well. There are always exceptions where things change so I'm hoping this year is one of those times.
Sorry, let me be more precise. Your and idiot.
That retarded "clock management" issue that you keep harping on, without a shred of evidence or data to back up your claims, was blown completely out of the water yesterday, or weren't you sharp enough to see it right there in front of your face?
In the 2nd quarter, Andy calls a quick drive after the great kick return to score at about 9:55 remaining in the half.
The defense gets the ball back to him and he runs another quick drive and scores another TD in near-record time, leaving more than 6 minutes on the clock.
We get the ball back again, and Andy calls yet a third drive that scores in an NFL playoff record time of 3:23 seconds.
And then when he gets the ball back a fourth time, he calls a final TD scoring drive while leaving the Texans about a half a minute on the clock.
That's the greatest "clock management" performance you've ever seen, dipstick.
Write it down. Staple it to your forehead. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
Sorry, let me be more precise. Your and idiot.
That retarded "clock management" issue that you keep harping on, without a shred of evidence or data to back up your claims, was blown completely out of the water yesterday, or weren't you sharp enough to see it right there in front of your face?
In the 2nd quarter, Andy calls a quick drive after the great kick return to score at about 9:55 remaining in the half.
The defense gets the ball back to him and he runs another quick drive and scores another TD in near-record time, leaving more than 6 minutes on the clock.
We get the ball back again, and Andy calls yet a third drive that scores in an NFL playoff record time of 3:23 seconds.
And then when he gets the ball back a fourth time, he calls a final TD scoring drive while leaving the Texans about a half a minute on the clock.
That's the greatest "clock management" performance you've ever seen, dipstick.
Write it down. Staple it to your forehead.
How much of an asshole do you have to be to respond to a simple football debate the way you do when i never called you any names or were rude to you? The clock management issue never came into play yesterday since the game was a blowout. You're not even addressing the issue im talking about or that the article i quoted talked about - probably bc you're too stupid to keep up. Then again, you probably dismissed the whole article as "coachspeak" even though andy and a ton of people he worked with all say it's a deliberate philosophy. If you're too stupid to follow the conversation, then you may as well stay out of it. Posting "stupid" adds nothing jerkoff.
Go back and read DJLN's reply to my post, print it out and staple that to your forehead you fucking mouthbreather bc that's how you intelligently discuss football. [Reply]
All I know is Andy's gameplanning and playcalling yesterday were masterful. I guarantee you Mahomes is grateful his QB star got attached to such an offensive mastermind, and great person. Can't wait to see what he draws up for this week. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lilmrp117:
How much of an asshole do you have to be to respond to a simple football debate the way you do when i never called you any names or were rude to you? The clock management issue never came into play yesterday since the game was a blowout. You're not even addressing the issue im talking about or that the article i quoted talked about - probably bc you're too stupid to keep up. Then again, you probably dismissed the whole article as "coachspeak" even though andy and a ton of people he worked with all say it's a deliberate philosophy. If you're too stupid to follow the conversation, then you may as well stay out of it. Posting "stupid" adds nothing jerkoff.
Go back and read DJLN's reply to my post, print it out and staple that to your forehead you ****ing mouthbreather bc that's how you intelligently discuss football.
When you actually bring real facts I might deign to have a civil conversation with you. Until then, you're a parroting toadie.
As for the stupid TO argument, who gives a flying shit if he uses TOs differently than other coaches? I got news for you genius. All the great ones use them slightly differently from each other.
And Andy has a very successful record of using a TO to get his troops on the same page and then executing a great play coming out of that TO. Most coaches in the league would kill to be able to do that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
Sorry, let me be more precise. Your and idiot.
That retarded "clock management" issue that you keep harping on, without a shred of evidence or data to back up your claims, was blown completely out of the water yesterday, or weren't you sharp enough to see it right there in front of your face?
In the 2nd quarter, Andy calls a quick drive after the great kick return to score at about 9:55 remaining in the half.
The defense gets the ball back to him and he runs another quick drive and scores another TD in near-record time, leaving more than 6 minutes on the clock.
We get the ball back again, and Andy calls yet a third drive that scores in an NFL playoff record time of 3:23 seconds.
And then when he gets the ball back a fourth time, he calls a final TD scoring drive while leaving the Texans about a half a minute on the clock.
That's the greatest "clock management" performance you've ever seen, dipstick.
Write it down. Staple it to your forehead.
I am agreeing with most of what you said. But I do think that Andy could have managed the clock a little better on the final drive of the half. First and goal and 3 straight passes left time on the clock for Houston to get I to field goal range. Just one run could have bled the clock down to nearly nothing. But that's just nitpicking. It worked out. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lilmrp117:
I know this article was mentioned in its own thread, but I think it makes more sense in this thread's discussion. This article details the exact flaw that I am most concerned with. It's not that Andy just goofs on the clock sometimes, or what we have been calling "clock management." It's that he has a philosophy where he ****s up the clock ON PURPOSE.
The article mentions how Reid uses his timeouts like in basketball to calm down everyone and he takes a slower pace to make sure they get the play right, but football is not basketball and this is a stupid strategy that has backfired again and again. Football is not continous play like basketball - there are breaks between plays. Football coaches shouldn't have to call timeouts to "calm" players or get the right play called.
Also, his slower pace and timeouts give the D a chance to calm down and reset as well at a time when the offense could be dictating the pace and tiring the D out and using the time to its advantage in some cases. But Andy is so stubborn and he thinks he's such a great playcaller that he can just call a better play than the D and that this will outweigh any time advantage. This is why we lost that chargers game last year that's mentioned in the article as one example of how this approach backfires a lot.
What the best coaches do is that they practice and plan for these situations ahead of time so that when the situation comes up, they can just call a play and expect the players to be professional and execute it without needing their poor little nerves calmed down. Good teams do this all the time, but reid is so stubborn he sticks with this misguided philosophy of sacrificing timeouts and taking too long.
Before people slam me for criticizing reid after a nice win, just remember that I said that I think we will still win the bowl despite this flaw and i still think andy is a great coach. If we keep scoring like yesterday, then clock management won't even come into play. But this flaw in reid's game management is still lurking. I just hope it doesn't bite his ass again.
By the way, I'm not blaming andy for the poor start yesterday. kelce, robinson, and tyreek should know they need to catch the ball in their hands.
Again, this is the appreciation thread. How is this possibly confusing to you? [Reply]
Originally Posted by jjchieffan:
I am agreeing with most of what you said. But I do think that Andy could have managed the clock a little better on the final drive of the half. First and goal and 3 straight passes left time on the clock for Houston to get I to field goal range. Just one run could have bled the clock down to nearly nothing. But that's just nitpicking. It worked out.
Reviewing those last three plays it looks a lot like Andy/Pat were trying to get Damien involved in the drive (1st-and-goal) and then DRob on 2nd-and-goal. If Pat's not stepping backwards when he throws to Damien, that's an easy TD. And he's not being dragged down when he throws to DRob, there's no one within 7-8 yards of DRob. The play design sent everyone to the left, and someone interferes with DRob's defender just enough to force them to lose a step in trail. If either play scores, there would've been a little over a minute left.
Maybe Andy was thinking about getting the ball back again?
It's not crazy; with a minute to go and two TOs in his pocket, HOU would be forced to throw to move down the field to get into scoring position. Spags could do his thing, maybe force a T/O, and maybe even a short field with time on the clock.
If all he wanted to do was run down the clock, he's did that before against the Lions. And whichever other team that was.
But he obviously tried to score quickly there.
I think maybe he was looking for a gift from Billy O' Brien. Whatever. That last series makes a complete fiction of the idea that Andy doesn't know how to score quickly when necessary. He went 90 yards in 5 plays and about 1:30 minutes.
The whole BS idea that Andy would call a 16 or 13 play drive on purpose because he can't tell time is utter nonsense. [Reply]
Marty would have coached it better, since he is apparently arguably better
Marty was about to go to the Super Bowl with Cleveland and Byner fumbles as he is about to score a TD, and the play is so infamous, if you Google "The Drive" the first search result is about that play. (Then the next year Elway pulls off The Drive, but that was on the defense) THE LOSS IS NOT MARTY'S FAULT
Marty was going to the Super Bowl with San Diego, and in the pregame he walked up to each DB and told them that when they caught the game clenching interception, to just go down. What did the DB do? He tried to return it and got stripped and the Patriots go to the Super Bowl. THE LOSS IS NOT MARTY'S FAULT
And in Kansas City he is about to go to the Super Bowl, and Kimble Anders drops a pass on the goal line, and then Montana get a concussion, and he loses to the Bill's. If Joe doesn't leave that game, we had a legitimate chance. This loss is partially on Marty, but not really.
Then he has an all time defense, and his kicker misses 3 field goals. Why did the kicker miss 3 easy, kicks? Because the President/GM decided to cut/not resign the second most accurate FG kicker ever (at the time) because he wanted to save about $1,000,000 dollars, even though the team had money to spend against the cap. The President/GM was just greedy. This loss was on Peterson.
Each of those franchises were absolute garbage, bottom barrel teams when he became the HC, and except for some freak plays, he would have taken every one of them to the Super Bowl.
Which of these records belongs to Andy Reid?
200–126–1 (.613)
207–128–1 (.618)
Yes, Marty Schottenheimer is arguably a better coach than Andy Reid. The word arguably doesn't mean what several people on CP think it means, apparently.
Saying that Marty is arguably better than Andy means it could be argued. What he accomplished in Cleveland, Kansas City, and San Diego given the state of those teams when he took over, is more impressive than what Reid did in Philly and Kansas City.
Yes, Marty Schottenheimer is arguably a better coach than Andy Reid. The word arguably doesn't mean what several people on CP think it means, apparently.
Saying that Marty is arguably better than Andy means it could be argued. What he accomplished in Cleveland, Kansas City, and San Diego given the state of those teams when he took over, is more impressive than what Reid did in Philly and Kansas City.
Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic:
Which of these records belongs to Andy Reid?
200–126–1 (.613)
207–128–1 (.618)
Yes, Marty Schottenheimer is arguably a better coach than Andy Reid. The word arguably doesn't mean what several people on CP think it means, apparently.
Saying that Marty is arguably better than Andy means it could be argued. What he accomplished in Cleveland, Kansas City, and San Diego given the state of those teams when he took over, is more impressive than what Reid did in Philly and Kansas City.
Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk
Argue it, then.
Don't argue that he's almost as good - argue that he's better.
Because even your strongest data point - the comparable regular season records - doesn't support that Marty was better. Especially when you give us nonsense like "the state of those teams when he took over..."
Cleveland in '83: 9-7
Kansas City in '88: 4-11-1
Washington in '00: 8-8
San Diego in '01: 5-11 (with Drew Brees on the roster)
Marty's squads immediately before he took over were a combined 26-37-1 for a .414 winning percentage.
Eagles in '98: 3-13
Chiefs in '12: 2-14
Reid's squads were 5-27 for a staggeringly awful .156 winning percentage.
The 'state of those teams' when Marty took over were universally better than any of the teams that Reid took over. They weren't great, but they were clearly better.
So like I said - don't make an argument that he's almost as good. That's an arguable position that I wouldn't quibble loudly with.
Give me an argument that he's better. You just can't.
Marty was a good coach, but there is no argument to make at all that he was a better one than Andy Reid. Not regular season success, not post-season success, not the mountains he had to climb, not in terms of his impact/innovation in the league. There is simply no argument to be made that Marty Schottenheimer, as good as he was, was a better coach than Andy Reid. [Reply]
