PDA

View Full Version : Don't you Remember Marty-Ball??


Sportswax
10-26-2005, 05:22 PM
Didn't anyone on this BB watch Shottenheimer throw away the Chargers game last week with his locked-in, play it safe, Martyball? Going for Field Goals instead of touchdowns cost them the game against the Eagles, who go for it at all costs. I look for Philadelphia to do us another favor when they visit Denver this weekend. The Chiefs will open up a can of OFFENSE, and let the team of Vermeil and Cunningham teach their predecessor a lesson in when to use conservative playcalling. The films of the Chiefs' first six games won't tip their hand with regard to the offensive potential this team possesses. I have a feeling Mr. Martyball has been watching them over his shoulder since draft day.

Hoover
10-26-2005, 05:27 PM
The Eagles got lucky, return a blocked FG for a TD? Marty just has some bad ass luck. And LT can take it to the house any time he is handed the ball, so ya can't blame Marty for giving the ball to his best player.

SLAG
10-26-2005, 05:29 PM
I remember this weekend it was 4th down and Bree's and Co. came out and i was like ive seen this before...

They were just trying to get the offsides or encroahment or something.. No Balls to go for it on 4th down

Count Zarth
10-26-2005, 05:33 PM
It was classic Marty Ball.

San Diego's D held on a 4th and 1. The Chargers got the ball at Philly's 30 yard line.

What did they do?

1-10-PHI30 (3:29) L.Tomlinson up the middle to PHI 28 for 2 yards
2-8-PHI28 (3:27) L.Tomlinson right end to PHI 23 for 5 yards
3-3-PHI23 (3:21) L.Tomlinson up the middle to PHI 22 for 1 yard

milkman
10-26-2005, 05:36 PM
The Eagles got lucky, return a blocked FG for a TD? Marty just has some bad ass luck. And LT can take it to the house any time he is handed the ball, so ya can't blame Marty for giving the ball to his best player.

I am just stunned and mystified at this concept that Marty is just a victim of bad luck.

Marty's "bad luck" is just a by product of his never learning to play to win.

milkman
10-26-2005, 05:37 PM
It was classic Marty Ball.

San Diego's D held on a 4th and 1. The Chargers got the ball at Philly's 30 yard line.

What did they do?

1-10-PHI30 (3:29) L.Tomlinson up the middle to PHI 28 for 2 yards
2-8-PHI28 (3:27) L.Tomlinson right end to PHI 23 for 5 yards
3-3-PHI23 (3:21) L.Tomlinson up the middle to PHI 22 for 1 yard

Exactly what I'm talking about.

Marty didn't play to win.

Chiefnj
10-26-2005, 05:43 PM
Vermeil/Saunders and any other head coach with a HB as talented as LT or Holmes would have done the exact same thing Marty did last week and that is give the ball to your playmaker and try to go up by a TD.

Count Zarth
10-26-2005, 05:43 PM
Exactly what I'm talking about.

Marty didn't play to win.

Seriously, a TD at that point would have put it away.

This is what I am talking about when Chiefs fans complain about Saunders passing the ball in similar situations. We should never be afraid to throw the ball.

Skip Towne
10-26-2005, 05:44 PM
Uh, Sportswax, the Chargers are averaging 27.6 points per game. We are averaging 24.8 points per game. They are at home. I doubt we teach them much about offense.

Chiefnj
10-26-2005, 05:46 PM
Seriously, a TD at that point would have put it away.

This is what I am talking about when Chiefs fans complain about Saunders passing the ball in similar situations. We should never be afraid to throw the ball.

People still complain about Saunders passing the ball in the redzone a year ago and it leading to a lucky INT. "You don't throw the ball, hand it to Priest."

milkman
10-26-2005, 05:47 PM
Vermeil/Saunders and any other head coach with a HB as talented as LT or Holmes would have done the exact same thing Marty did last week and that is give the ball to your playmaker and try to go up by a TD.

Yes they would, but not on all 3 downs when the defense has been stuffing that back all game long.

People would complain about it if it failed, or worse resulted in an int., but on one of those 3 downs, we'd see a play action pass from Saunders.

milkman
10-26-2005, 05:49 PM
People still complain about Saunders passing the ball in the redzone a year ago and it leading to a lucky INT. "You don't throw the ball, hand it to Priest."

When Priest is having success, I'd rather see him get the ball in the red zone, but I am also not going to complain about Saunders attacking.

I'll complain about the int, but not about the play call.

Skip Towne
10-26-2005, 05:51 PM
To paraphrase Woody Hayes - When you throw the ball, three things can happen. And two of them are bad.

Count Zarth
10-26-2005, 05:52 PM
To paraphrase Woody Hayes - When you throw the ball, three things can happen. And two of them are bad.

Guess who beat Woody Hayes in the Rose Bowl?

That's right...DICK VERMEIL!!!

Chiefnj
10-26-2005, 05:55 PM
People would complain about it if it failed, or worse resulted in an int., but on one of those 3 downs, we'd see a play action pass from Saunders.

When the Chiefs were nursing a 6 point lead against the Raiders with just under 2 minutes left they ran the ball three times. On the third they picked up the first down. But they still kept it safe.

milkman
10-26-2005, 05:57 PM
When the Chiefs were nursing a 6 point lead against the Randy Moss and the Raiderz with just under 2 minutes left they ran the ball three times. On the third they picked up the first down. But they still kept it safe.

Different situation.

The Chargers were on the Eagles side of the field.

FloridaChief
10-26-2005, 05:57 PM
To paraphrase Woody Hayes - When you throw the ball, three things can happen. And two of them are bad.

Ahhh, shades of a Johnny Proctor post....

The memories, the memories....

alanm
10-26-2005, 06:00 PM
People still complain about Saunders passing the ball in the redzone a year ago and it leading to a lucky INT. "You don't throw the ball, hand it to Priest."
Yeah, But that situation was different. We had one yard to go for a TD. :cuss: :banghead: :cuss:

Skip Towne
10-26-2005, 06:03 PM
Ahhh, shades of a Johnny Proctor post....

The memories, the memories....
I think I'll neg rep you.

Sportswax
10-26-2005, 06:06 PM
Anytime you have fourth and short on the opposing team's side of the field,.... Martyball means going for the Field Goal instead of the TD. Playing it safe only adds 3 points no matter how you look at it.

Calcountry
10-26-2005, 06:13 PM
It was classic Marty Ball.

San Diego's D held on a 4th and 1. The Chargers got the ball at Philly's 30 yard line.

What did they do?

1-10-PHI30 (3:29) L.Tomlinson up the middle to PHI 28 for 2 yards
2-8-PHI28 (3:27) L.Tomlinson right end to PHI 23 for 5 yards
3-3-PHI23 (3:21) L.Tomlinson up the middle to PHI 22 for 1 yardYou forgot the part about 4rth and long one, kick a field goal, Blocked, now I am behind.

Calcountry
10-26-2005, 06:17 PM
When Priest is having success, I'd rather see him get the ball in the red zone, but I am also not going to complain about Saunders attacking.

I'll complain about the int, but not about the play call.Attack, fine. But Puhlease, no more empty backfields when we are attacking. I like sneak attacks myself.

Calcountry
10-26-2005, 06:21 PM
Seriously, a TD at that point would have put it away.

This is what I am talking about when Chiefs fans complain about Saunders passing the ball in similar situations. We should never be afraid to throw the ball.Fear is what makes for a weak passing game. As far as the Int goes in that game against Texas, one of these days the Chiefs might try an out and up, where Trent fake pumps on teh quick out, then lobs it up and over the guy who is jumping the play.

tk13
10-26-2005, 06:23 PM
I'll tell you a play that might show the difference between the two staffs. The OT win vs. Green Bay a couple years ago. We get a fumble... not in FG range but not super far away from it, we were near midfield. First play, we went deep over the top for the TD and the kill, won the game. Does anyone think Marty would've tried that?

milkman
10-26-2005, 06:23 PM
Attack, fine. But Puhlease, no more empty backfields when we are attacking. I like sneak attacks myself.

I agree with that.
The passing game works better if you have to account for the run.

Sportswax
10-26-2005, 06:48 PM
I'll tell you a play that might show the difference between the two staffs. The OT win vs. Green Bay a couple years ago. We get a fumble... not in FG range but not super far away from it, we were near midfield. First play, we went deep over the top for the TD and the kill, won the game. Does anyone think Marty would've tried that?


That's one of my favorite Sportbar experiences, and I alluded to that game the other day. It was Maslowski who got the fumble from Green. I had bought all the Packers' fans in the place Grilled Cheese sandwiches when the the Chiefs were losing... swearing to them that Green Bay would fall. They all had to eat their grilled cheese.

Calcountry
10-26-2005, 06:52 PM
I'll tell you a play that might show the difference between the two staffs. The OT win vs. Green Bay a couple years ago. We get a fumble... not in FG range but not super far away from it, we were near midfield. First play, we went deep over the top for the TD and the kill, won the game. Does anyone think Marty would've tried that?Excellent example. I remember that play and thought the same thing, WOW, they go for the throat these days.

Calcountry
10-26-2005, 06:57 PM
I am certain, that Marty wakes up in the middle of the night with cold sweats, always the same nightmare.

The scoreboard reads 3 point lead and 5:00 to go in the Fourth, now what the fug am I GONNA DO. The clock isn't ticking, the players are playing but the clock isn't ticking, how do I get that time off the clock before, before, it isn't ticking , OMG BAMMM he wakes up in the cold sweats.

Takes him about an hour to settle, goes for the shot of Nyquil, takes a pee, then goes back to bed, tosses and turns, can't sleep; so he goes down to his office, turns on the film and grinds. Poor bastard, I almost feel sorry for him. Just not on our time anymore dammit.

Hoover
10-26-2005, 07:00 PM
So he gets the ball and is in FG range and you terd think he should go deep when a FG seals the deal?

Calcountry
10-26-2005, 07:08 PM
So he gets the ball and is in FG range and you terd think he should go deep when a FG seals the deal?Dude, he did the same thing agains the Jets in the playoff game, they missed the FG.

He is haunted by "The Fumble". He doesn't ever want that to happen again, and it has hamstrung his decision making at critical junctures of the game.

He should just say fug it, I am gonna go for it on fourth down and one on the other teams side of the field regardless of the situation for a whole season, just so he won't second guess, see how good it feels, then move on with his life.

How come the Tuna, when he was with the Giants, always went for it on 4rth and one, and usually got the first?

He just has to look at those players and say, I trust you guys, don't let me down. Now go get the job done.

milkman
10-26-2005, 07:08 PM
So he gets the ball and is in FG range and you terd think he should go deep when a FG seals the deal?

Nothing wrong with going deep, but that isn't what I'm talking about.

Marty's mentality is "We are in FG range, we don't won't to make a mistake and give up points"

An attacking mentality is making play calls with the idea of scoring a TD.

milkman
10-26-2005, 07:09 PM
Dude, he did the same thing agains the Jets in the playoff game, they missed the FG.

He is haunted by "The Fumble". He doesn't ever want that to happen again, and it has hamstrung his decision making at critical junctures of the game.

He should just say fug it, I am gonna go for it on fourth down and one on the other teams side of the field regardless of the situation for a whole season, just so he won't second guess, see how good it feels, then move on with his life.

How come the Tuna, when he was with the Giants, always went for it on 4rth and one, and usually got the first?

He just has to look at those players and say, I trust you guys, don't let me down. Now go get the job done.

Said it so much better than me!

Calcountry
10-26-2005, 07:15 PM
Said it so much better than me!Martyball drove me away from the Chiefs for a few years. I just couldn't take the chit anymore. He picked a fine time to leave me Lucille, "resigned" right when we are on the downs of a cycle, then lands in San Diego. Fug that ashat.

Hoover
10-26-2005, 07:18 PM
I agree that Marty wasn't attacking the Philly D with 3:29 left in the game. But that Philly D was awesome that D, LT (The best player in the entire NFL if you ask) had been held to like 12 yards or something. Likewise the Charges D held McNabb and co to just 13 points. If they Kick a FG and make it he is up 7 with 2 minutes left to play, hell I like those odds considering the Philly offense really didn't do anything all day. Hindsight is 20/20, three running plays to a back was dumb, I give you that. But if you were watching the same game I was Philly was going down until a blocked FG for a TD.

milkman
10-26-2005, 07:25 PM
I agree that Marty wasn't attacking the Philly D with 3:29 left in the game. But that Philly D was awesome that D, LT (The best player in the entire NFL if you ask) had been held to like 12 yards or something. Likewise the Charges D held McNabb and co to just 13 points. If they Kick a FG and make it he is up 7 with 2 minutes left to play, hell I like those odds considering the Philly offense really didn't do anything all day. Hindsight is 20/20, three running plays to a back was dumb, I give you that. But if you were watching the same game I was Philly was going down until a blocked FG for a TD.

And I have every confidence that Marty, in his infinite wisdom, would go into a prevent D, allowing McNabb to march the Eagles right down the field for a game tying TD.

After that, it's anyone's game in OT, but I'd I'd put my money on whoever Marty isn't coaching.

Sportswax
10-26-2005, 07:28 PM
Death to the Chargers.

Calcountry
10-26-2005, 07:29 PM
I agree that Marty wasn't attacking the Philly D with 3:29 left in the game. But that Philly D was awesome that D, LT (The best player in the entire NFL if you ask) had been held to like 12 yards or something. Likewise the Charges D held McNabb and co to just 13 points. If they Kick a FG and make it he is up 7 with 2 minutes left to play, hell I like those odds considering the Philly offense really didn't do anything all day. Hindsight is 20/20, three running plays to a back was dumb, I give you that. But if you were watching the same game I was Philly was going down until a blocked FG for a TD.With all that success running the ball, it makes you wonder Just WTF was in Marty's head, running the ball 3 times with the game on the line?

:hmmm:

Calcountry
10-26-2005, 07:31 PM
And I have every confidence that Marty, in his infinite wisdom, would go into a prevent D, allowing McNabb to march the Eagles right down the field for a game tying TD.

After that, it's anyone's game in OT, but I'd I'd put my money on whoever Marty isn't coaching.His strategy works great against teams like the Raiders, you know, teams that have a tendence to commit penalties and make mistakes. Problem with his philosophy this year, is that he has very few weak teams on his schedule with which to use that philosophy on.

Sportswax
10-26-2005, 07:32 PM
Don't forget that Tomlinson was getting stuffed all day in that game with a career low 7 yards on the whole day. Drew Brees should've done a keeper, since he was the leading Chargers rusher that day.

Pee - shah.... Chiefs will stuff them just like they did to Ricky Williams last week!

Calcountry
10-26-2005, 07:32 PM
I have to go home now, but I leave you all with this. During his KC years, I took to calling Marty, "Shortenheimer". Because he always comes up short.

He hasn't let me down since he left KC either.

ChiefsFanatic
10-26-2005, 07:33 PM
The Eagles got lucky, return a blocked FG for a TD? Marty just has some bad ass luck. And LT can take it to the house any time he is handed the ball, so ya can't blame Marty for giving the ball to his best player.

Yeah, and if Caldwell just covers the damn ball up they kick the tying FG at the very least.

Sportswax
10-26-2005, 07:47 PM
"ya can't blame Marty for giving the ball to his best player."

I blame him if the guy only has seven yards in the whole game!!!!!!!!

Sportswax
10-27-2005, 01:46 AM
Yeah, and if Caldwell just covers the damn ball up they kick the tying FG at the very least.


Gawd!!! Let's hope it doesn't come down to a Field Goal situation this week. I don't have any fingernails left from the Vikings/Packers game last week.

Lzen
10-27-2005, 07:35 AM
The Eagles got lucky, return a blocked FG for a TD? Marty just has some bad ass luck. And LT can take it to the house any time he is handed the ball, so ya can't blame Marty for giving the ball to his best player.

The Eagles may have gotten lucky by getting a return TD off a blocked field goal, yes. But there's no way that luck has anything to do with Marty. A couple times could be called luck, sure. But when a head coach has this happen again and again and again thoughout a career in it's 3rd decade, it becomes obvious that his conservative nature has been the root of most of his so called "bad luck". Calling it bad luck is just an excuse.

Lzen
10-27-2005, 07:36 AM
I remember this weekend it was 4th down and Bree's and Co. came out and i was like ive seen this before...

They were just trying to get the offsides or encroahment or something.. No Balls to go for it on 4th down

That was always something that pissed me off to no end. They would line up, shift around a couple times, and try to pull them offsides with some hard "hut huts". :shake:

Chiefnj
10-27-2005, 07:42 AM
The Eagles may have gotten lucky by getting a return TD off a blocked field goal, yes. But there's no way that luck has anything to do with Marty. A couple times could be called luck, sure. But when a head coach has this happen again and again and again thoughout a career in it's 3rd decade, it becomes obvious that his conservative nature has been the root of most of his so called "bad luck". Calling it bad luck is just an excuse.


In any event that "bad luck" that plagues Marty still enables him to get his team into the postseason routinely. I kind of miss that "bad luck."

Lzen
10-27-2005, 07:48 AM
In any event that "bad luck" that plagues Marty still enables him to get his team into the postseason routinely. I kind of miss that "bad luck."

Yes, getting to the playoffs nearly every year was wonderful.

That is, until we got knocked out in the first round. Even when we had home field advantage a couple times. :shake: :rolleyes:

Chiefnj
10-27-2005, 07:55 AM
Yes, getting to the playoffs nearly every year was wonderful.

That is, until we got knocked out in the first round. Even when we had home field advantage a couple times. :shake: :rolleyes:

Just like with DV, except we don't make the postseason nearly as often.

htismaqe
10-27-2005, 08:22 AM
Just like with DV, except we don't make the postseason nearly as often.

Dick Vermeil has coached for 15 years. 6 playoff appearances, 2 Super Bowl appearances, 1 win.

Marty has coached for 20 years. 12 playoff appearances, 0 Super Bowl appearances.

You're saying you'd rather have a 60% chance of making the playoffs and a 0% chance of going all the way over a 40% chance of making the playoffs, even though a full one-third of that 40% resulted in a Super Bowl berth.

Chiefnj
10-27-2005, 08:39 AM
Dick Vermeil has coached for 15 years. 6 playoff appearances, 2 Super Bowl appearances, 1 win.

Marty has coached for 20 years. 12 playoff appearances, 0 Super Bowl appearances.

You're saying you'd rather have a 60% chance of making the playoffs and a 0% chance of going all the way over a 40% chance of making the playoffs, even though a full one-third of that 40% resulted in a Super Bowl berth.

Do you want to compare Marty's first 4 years with KC and Vermeil's first 4 years with KC?

You also know very well that the stats you are throwing out have no relevance to the chances of KC winning a Super Bowl. It's kind of like relying on the mythical "DV will have the Chiefs in the Super Bowl in three years just like he did with the Rams and Eagles."

htismaqe
10-27-2005, 08:55 AM
Do you want to compare Marty's first 4 years with KC and Vermeil's first 4 years with KC?

You also know very well that the stats you are throwing out have no relevance to the chances of KC winning a Super Bowl. It's kind of like relying on the mythical "DV will have the Chiefs in the Super Bowl in three years just like he did with the Rams and Eagles."

What's that got to do with anything.

It's a simple fact: DV has proven he can get there, Marty has proven he can't.

Some chance is ALWAYS better than no chance.

Chiefnj
10-27-2005, 09:40 AM
What's that got to do with anything.

It's a simple fact: DV has proven he can get there, Marty has proven he can't.

Some chance is ALWAYS better than no chance.

It's got everything to do with it. How the coach does with the Chiefs is all that matters. What Vermeil did with the Rams was nice when used as a factor when he was first hired, but it doesn't mean a damn thing now, 4 years later when KC hasn't had a playoff win and more often than not doesn't even make the playoffs.

DV hasn't proven he can get there in KC. DV hasn't proven he can get past the wild card round in KC.

I understand you hate all things Marty. There is no point discussing this any further.

Sportswax
10-27-2005, 09:47 AM
DV Rules!!

htismaqe
10-27-2005, 09:47 AM
It's got everything to do with it. How the coach does with the Chiefs is all that matters. What Vermeil did with the Rams was nice when used as a factor when he was first hired, but it doesn't mean a damn thing now, 4 years later when KC hasn't had a playoff win and more often than not doesn't even make the playoffs.

DV hasn't proven he can get there in KC. DV hasn't proven he can get past the wild card round in KC.

I understand you hate all things Marty. There is no point discussing this any further.

If you're not using what they've done with other teams, and confining it SOLELY to the Chiefs, then you're not comparing COACHES at all. The only valid comparison is the whole of their careers. Marty has been with 5 teams and won nothing.

To confine it to the Chiefs requires inclusion of factors peculiar to the Chiefs, including Lamar Hunt and Carl Peterson (perhaps they're the REAL reason neither has done it with the Chiefs), the fans, the stadium, the city, etc.

jspchief
10-27-2005, 09:52 AM
First off, I think Marty did the smart thing in that game. When you have the lead late, you burn clock by running. Especially when you have Ladanian Tomlinson. The only thing I might have done different is throw on 3rd and medium.

He also did the right thing by kicking the FG 99 out of 100 times, the worst thing that can happen is you miss or it's blocked. The odds of that block resulting in a TD are miniscule.

He did the right thing. A few weeks ago, the media was flaming him for not putting the ball in the hands of LT when the game is on the line. Now all of a sudden it's the wrong thing? Hindsight is 20/20.

There may be a lot of times that Marty has lost games due to his conservative ways, but that series of downs shouldn't have been called any other way.

htismaqe
10-27-2005, 09:53 AM
In other words, Vermeil has been with 3 teams and been to the Super Bowl with 2 of them. The only team he hasn't taken there is KC. A very valid argument could be made that the reason for that is KANSAS CITY, not Dick Vermeil.

On the other hand, Marty has been with 5 teams and never been to the Super Bowl. It would be very difficult to make a case that anybody but him was responsible for his failure.

ptlyon
10-27-2005, 09:53 AM
To confine it to the Chiefs requires inclusion of factors peculiar to the Chiefs, including Lamar Hunt and Carl Peterson (perhaps they're the REAL reason neither has done it with the Chiefs), the fans, the stadium, the city, etc.

It's the stadium. They haven't won $hit there.

jspchief
10-27-2005, 09:54 AM
If you're not using what they've done with other teams, and confining it SOLELY to the Chiefs, then you're not comparing COACHES at all. The only valid comparison is the whole of their careers. Marty has been with 5 teams and won nothing.

To confine it to the Chiefs requires inclusion of factors peculiar to the Chiefs, including Lamar Hunt and Carl Peterson (perhaps they're the REAL reason neither has done it with the Chiefs), the fans, the stadium, the city, etc.I'm not sure Vermeil's resume matters much if he can't get it done with his current team.

I didn't see anyone saying they wanted Marty over DV. But the comparison between the two is not unwarranted.

htismaqe
10-27-2005, 09:59 AM
I'm not sure Vermeil's resume matters much if he can't get it done with his current team.

I didn't see anyone saying they wanted Marty over DV. But the comparison between the two is not unwarranted.

I agree on both points.

However, the two points are not mutually inclusive.

One cannot compare the two without taking into account what they've done with other teams.

It's my previous argument:

Did they not get to the Super Bowl because of themselves, or because of something peculiar to KC?

In Vermeil's case, his ENTIRE BODY of work would suggest that either answer could be true. In fact, he's been to the Super Bowl with every team he's coached, except this one.

In Marty's case, considering his entire career, it would be hard to suggest that anything other than the former is true.

Lzen
10-27-2005, 10:09 AM
What's that got to do with anything.

It's a simple fact: DV has proven he can get there, Marty has proven he can't.

Some chance is ALWAYS better than no chance.

Exactly. Sure, I haven't been completely happy with Vermeil. And I wish we would be able to make the playoffs more often. Frankly, I'm not real confident on a SB run this year. But I feel much more confident in the chance that he'll take us there than I would if Marty was still coaching. I loved Marty, but I was ready for someone new by the time he announced his resignation.

Sportswax
10-27-2005, 02:39 PM
This is what is known as bloviating.

htismaqe
10-27-2005, 02:42 PM
This is what is known as bloviating.

This is what as known as superfluous posting.

DJJasonp
10-27-2005, 02:47 PM
In all actuality....passing the ball is what cost Marty and the chargers the game.....

With 8 min left in the game....Brees is passing (instead of a conservative play call)...and he's picked....led to 3 pts for Philly....

Then...with 1:57 left in the game and already down to philly's 37 yd line....Marty elects to NOT be conservative and play for the FG...and passes the ball to Caldwell, who runs it down to the 17...and fumbles the game away.

I'm not a charger fan, nor a Marty fan....but Marty is damned if he does, damned if he doesnt with his play calling....but this game certainly wasnt conservative....

Which game did you watch?

Sportswax
10-27-2005, 03:12 PM
Sorry... but running the ball three times in a row lost the game in the end... not the interception. They had a chance to win and didn't push for it. They played to lose, and that's Martyball.

CHIEF4EVER
10-27-2005, 05:29 PM
It was classic Marty Ball.

San Diego's D held on a 4th and 1. The Chargers got the ball at Philly's 30 yard line.

What did they do?

1-10-PHI30 (3:29) L.Tomlinson up the middle to PHI 28 for 2 yards
2-8-PHI28 (3:27) L.Tomlinson right end to PHI 23 for 5 yards
3-3-PHI23 (3:21) L.Tomlinson up the middle to PHI 22 for 1 yard

Exactly. That is the same old crapola he used to do in KC when he was here. 1st Down & 10: Let's run the ball up Grunnys azz. 2d Down and 8: Let's throw a screen pass behind the line of scrimmage and hope Anders can get some yards. 3rd and 7: Let's trick em and run the ball up Grunnys azz again....they'll never expect THAT. 4th and 6: Punt.