Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
I don't disagree with you - it's not what I'd have done. I'd give up the FG and play the boundaries to take even the risk of a TD off the board.
As you noted - we have PM. And in a 4 down situation w/ 3 timeouts I still think he's damn near unstoppable in a gotta have it drive.
But I do think that was the logic behind it and it wasn't entirely unreasonable.
|
Chase had 10 catches for 236 and 3 td to the point of 3rd n 27.
Take a moment. Let it sink in.
TEN CATCHES.
236 YARDS
3 TOUCHDOWNS .
It is absolutely, ONE THOUSAND PERCENT UNREASONABLE to call ANY single coverage on Chase at this point.
He has skull****ed both of your eye sockets and your mouth to this point.
Situational football? Sounds hard?
Let's take a look.
It's 3rd n 27, tie game, they're looking at 60 yard fg if they don't gain another yard. My defensive scheme has been assraped so hard that we've got a pink sock prolapse going on here.
Who would Joe Burrow look to here? Gotta have it, 3rd down.
Chase? Nah. Single coverage. Matter of fact, zero blitz.
This is Pete Carrol Superbowl goal line pass level stupidity.
Everyone watching the game knew this down, the ball was going to Chase. Why would it not?
Unfathomable stupidity and a very concerning lack of awareness as to what has taken place in the game to this point to call any single coverage on Chase, let alone a zero blitz.
If that had been a playoff loss, dude would be run out of KC as fast as Dee Ford.