BLOCKED_PUNT
Footballguy
I can't wait till next year when Burton is the #2
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
**TNF on Prime - Bengals at Ravens** (-6, 52.5) 8:15 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ministry of Pain
- Start date
I thought a team would trade for Calais Campbell. There were phone calls. At age 38, Calais is 5th graded among DI, great vs the run, good pass rush, several batted passes. Why not a return to BAL, a chance for a ring.
Donnybrook
Footballguy
Lamar is Lamar and that is all I can say about Lamar
ProstheticRGK
Footballguy
When he is in Madden Mode- there isn’t anyone better. He’s Maholmes with a power-up.
Football Jones
Footballguy
Now there's 2 teams with a top QB.
Great game despite the sour ending.
Great game despite the sour ending.
BLOCKED_PUNT
Footballguy
Why does this make you sad, QuizGuy66?
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
The ceiling games are just astronomical.
Floor is high as well. Age, QB, plus the propensity of RB to get hurt & presence of Allgeier - Bijan is a fine FF asset, but I make that deal 100/100 times.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
I’m in for that.
The last violent xmas movie I saw was awesome. It’s one of favorite genres.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
GroveDiesel
Footballguy
You’d have to be as a defender NOT to commit holding/pass interference in that end of game situation. Officials almost never call penalties on those plays. And what if worst case happens and they call it? The offense gets one yard closer and tries again? What are the odds the refs call penalties twice in a row there? Almost zero, right?
If you go for two there, you’d better either be able to power run it in, or dial up a trick play of some sort that gives your receiver a free release so he doesn’t get fouled.
Teams with Les’s mobile QBs like Burrow are at such a disadvantage compared to teams with QBs like Jackson/Mahomes/Allen/Daniels because the threat of the QB run along with their ability to buy more time are such huge pluses for offenses at the goaline/going for 2.
If you go for two there, you’d better either be able to power run it in, or dial up a trick play of some sort that gives your receiver a free release so he doesn’t get fouled.
Teams with Les’s mobile QBs like Burrow are at such a disadvantage compared to teams with QBs like Jackson/Mahomes/Allen/Daniels because the threat of the QB run along with their ability to buy more time are such huge pluses for offenses at the goaline/going for 2.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Go read the TB/KC thread. They were killing Bowles for kicking the XP and sending the game to OT.
The question is do you trust your defense to make a stop? If you do, you can risk losing a coin toss. If you don't, put it on your offense to get 2 yards. If I'm Cincy, on the road, I trust my offense more.
eighsse2
Footballguy
Suppose you're Baltimore. And suppose it was your choice, as Baltimore, to decide whether Cincinnati kicks the extra point, or goes for two. Would you then choose to make Cincinnati kick the extra point? Honest question, because it would seem strange if you would choose the same option from either team's standpoint, so I assume you'd force them to kick.
ETA: I think there's too much of this "you haven't been stopping them; therefore you cannot stop them in overtime". Cincinnati forced 5 punts.
cheese
Footballguy
Not only do I not think they could stop them in overtime, I don’t think they could stop them for 30 seconds if they were up 1. I would have kicked mainly because NFL coaches are so conservative they probably run like a draw or something if you kick. If you go for 2 with the Bengals D, you have to both make the conversion and stop Lamar/Tucker when they have nothing to lose.
Harry Frogfish
Footballguy
I don't get NOT going for two. Especially given that situation.
People immediately jump to blame when it doesn't work out. But that doesn't mean the decision was wrong, it just means it didn't work this time.
I would put their chances of winning the game, given all I had seen and all the possibilities that could unfold from that point on, DEFINITELY higher by going for the win. They make that conversion more often than not. Whereas tying the game immediately gives Baltimore the higher chance of winning. Starting with another possession and plenty of time to get the best kicker and great QB/offense vs a gassed D, a very real shot at ending it before you even get to the coin flip with your gimpy QB, on the road.
Last edited:
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
I liked the call. Put it in your own hands, take the coin flip and Jackson out of the equation. You saw Bakers reaction when KC won the coin toss..like it is over.
How they missed the hands to the face of Burrow and the holding on the last play is beyond me but they did.
That being said I hate the NFL regular season OT rule. If both teams had a chance Cinci would have kicked the PAT but that is not the case.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
The point is you're Monday morning quarterbacking.
If you go for the XP and lose in OT, fans complain (see, the TB/KC thread). If you go for 2 and lose in regulation, fans complain (see, this thread).
The only time these end of the game calls are any good is when you win.
Cowboysfan8
Footballguy
Absolutely right
Grigs Allmoon
Footballguy
I wasn't talking about the delay. I'm well aware that there is about a 40 second delay for NFL games.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
Because the kid can't run a route and needs a major shift in approach before he drops the bag completely. Talent can't overcome that. At least it wasn't as high a pick as was wasted on Ross.
-QG
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
I was fine with going for two.
Our defense can't stop anything. If anything I was more irritated they didn't eat any clock on the drive.
Did not love the play choice at all. Though at least it was Hudson and not Sample who was targeted as I initially thought.
Resigned that the refs would miss all kinds of stuff on the last play - we always have to overcome that so the expectation is baked in - just need to beat all 18 in those situations.
The lack of an effective run game really limits the calls available.
-QG
Our defense can't stop anything. If anything I was more irritated they didn't eat any clock on the drive.
Did not love the play choice at all. Though at least it was Hudson and not Sample who was targeted as I initially thought.
Resigned that the refs would miss all kinds of stuff on the last play - we always have to overcome that so the expectation is baked in - just need to beat all 18 in those situations.
The lack of an effective run game really limits the calls available.
-QG
cheese
Footballguy
Hey brother. I think the play was really for Gesicki based on the way Hudson seems to intentionally go get the coverage and pull them away from MOF. In hindsight, once Gesicki went to the ground he probably should've looked at 1 or tried to buy time, but the pass rush was coming hard.
2 games against Baltimore:
21 rec
457 yds
5tds
Brad Stephens and Marcus Williams are still playing rock, scissors, paper to figure out who is supposed to cover him.
Harbaugh after the game on Chase: "I do give him credit. He's a great player," Harbaugh said Thursday night in his postgame press conference. "I was looking for him after the game and couldn't find him. Maybe that was appropriate,"
eighsse2
Footballguy
Oh, no. I have never, ever complained about kicking an extra point to tie it up rather than going for two. The fans en masse appear hypocritical since there are different fans with different opinions, so someone is always complaining (and yeah there are plenty of actually hypocritical individuals who will complain either way). But I have always preferred tying the thing up.
But the more I think about it, the odds are probably very similar. Kind of a "do you want a 100% chance of a 50% chance of winning, or do you want a 50% chance of a 100% chance of winning", you know, in rough numbers. So ... maybe I could even lean toward going for two, since it keeps you from having to play an extra period and risk injuries.
BLOCKED_PUNT
Footballguy
I'm optimistic, I guess. I spent a 2nd on him in my rookie draft and I have felt like, and maybe I am a terrible judge of talent, he has looked good to me. Yes, he needs to mature up but maybe after his rookie year and an another offseason maybe it will finally click for him.
urbanhack
Fight The Power!
Dude in our league has Burrow and Chase stacked. Bonus points for long TDs extra points for total passing yardage. Normally you need to put up 150 to 175 each week to have a shot a winning.
After yesterday this guy already has 150 points from just Chase and Burrow.
After yesterday this guy already has 150 points from just Chase and Burrow.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
Genuine question from pessimist me. How often does a WR start out undisciplined and gets their game together? Are there examples of guys that knuckleheaded their way through season one and turned it around in the later seasons? I was initially hopeful on Burton because Housh has him under his wing - I thought that gave us a little edge in terms of insight but I really feel like the best case is being an Alvin Harper but a reliable 1b/2 receiver is out of range.
-QG
Grigs Allmoon
Footballguy
Totally agree, given the situation. You can go for two if there is no chance the other team has a chance at a FG. That basically makes it 50/50, so go for it while you have the momentum.
With 33 seconds and 2 timeouts, that is a legit chance at a FG, so IMO, you do not go for 2 and the "win" there. (Much like the Bucc's game) You may have a 50/50 of going up by 1 point, but there is still a 10-30% chance the other team can return a kick, score a FG, etc. That sways that 50/50 2pt conversion a lot.
If you tie the game and the team has, say 33 seconds and 2 timeouts, they are very likely going to play conservative, and maybe call one play to see if they gain any significant yardage, and if not, go to OT.
That said, when I saw Cinci come out to go for 2 initially, I was like "No, no, no! Too much time left!" Then they called a TO, and I was thinking, "Wow, that was brilliant, they were trying to get Baltimore to burn a timeout." 33 seconds and 1 time out has a much lower chance at a winning FG than 33 seconds and 2 timeouts.
But then, they trotted back out and actually tried again. SMH.
Again, I am all for going for 2 when it is a kill shot, but if there is enough time on the clock for the other team to possibly get a FG for the win, you can't do it.
Last edited:
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
While I am a go for two guy anyway, I cannot imagine any Bengals fan (I'm not) wanting to see Burrows hit any more than one more time on that two point conversion. I get that he gets hit constantly, that their pretty use to him grimacing, and he usually keeps just keeps going, but there is no way as a fan I'd want him facing any more of a pounding.
Oh, and as a Ravens fan I think that unless the slow motion is messing up my perspective, that Humphrey hit on Burrows that begins all the grimacing was the roughing call that was most missed.
Similar threads
