Romeo sent a shot across the bow of Pioli

[petegz28]

After hearing all the talk today on radio, etc., as much as a lot of us would have liked to have seen Romeo go for the win in regulation he probably did the best thing for this team and sent a very clear and unmistakable message to Pioli that he will not put a game in Cassel's hands unless he has too.

There are some drawbacks as that same message gets sent to the team as well.

From former players to talking heads they have all basically said that there is no disguising this message. Romeo may have done us a favor and took us a huge step towards getting rid of Cassel.

Couple this with hearing last week from Maas that Romeo says he does not believe in Cassel. This is good news.

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

I understand that, but the first step towards recovery is admitting you have a problem.

Replacing Cassel with ANYONE is admitting that there's a problem. That's an improvement.

I'd happily make a lateral move at QB provided the next QB's treatment was equal to his actual skill. Cassel is treated with kids' gloves as if he's a 1st round draft pick QBOTF. He doesn't deserve that kind of leeway and never did.

If we make a lateral move to some journeyman QB, I'd be happy as long as the front office recognized this new QB as a stop gap. That's what journeyman QB's are for.

[BossChief]

That was a hug of "Matt, you look down in the dumps. You need a hug or something? Cheer up, we just beat the Saints!"

[mlyonsd]

Romeo=Herm

[CoMoChief]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

Romeo=Herm

he sure ****in coached like it....sucks when youre handcuffed by a shitty QB.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by BigRock

I disagree because of two things.

First, Romeo had the punt team on the field on 4th and 5. Then he foolishly called a timeout. Then they went for it. So his initial plan was to punt, meaning he probably didn't have a reasoned "Cassel blows but going for it actually puts less pressure on him" analysis like yours going on in his head. And it means he probably got talked into going for it, which isn't likely to happen with a coach who has no faith in his quarterback.

And second, blowing the timeout changed everything. Had they punted, they would have had 2 timeouts and the two-minute warning. But as it happened, having the punt team out, calling the timeout, and then going for it, they only had the one TO. That ended up doubling the pressure on Cassel.

If they didn't convert the 4th and 5, but then got a defensive stop, Cassel gets the ball back pinned deep and with less than a minute. That's a FAR worse scenario than if they'd punted. It's a worse scenario than if they went for it and failed without blowing the timeout. It's the worst scenario of them all. With Cassel it's basically impossible.

So it really all came down to that 4th and 5, which means they put all the pressure on Cassel with a do-or-die play. They put the game right in his hands. Again, not what a coach should be doing if he has no faith in his QB.

Just total bumble****ery. Trying to asign meaning to this bizarre hodgepodge of decisions is like trying to find reason or purpose in the crayon scribblings of a reerun who plays with his turds.

This is all well thought out and thought provoking.

But if I'm Romeo Crennel, would I rather punt the ball away, hope the defense makes one more stop, get it back and put the ball in Cassel's hands for a handful of plays, or would I rather take the chance that he can make one play.

Speaking for myself, I'm going to take the chance that he might make one play, rather than hope, if he does get it back, that he can make a series of plays.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by milkman

This is all well thought out and thought provoking.

But if I'm Romeo Crennel, would I rather punt the ball away, hope the defense makes one more stop, get it back and put the ball in Cassel's hands for a handful of plays, or would I rather take the chance that he can make one play.

Speaking for myself, I'm going to take the chance that he might make one play, rather than hope, if he does get it back, that he can make a series of plays.

In theory, I believe that BigRock agrees with us, but his larger point is that RAC doesn't think. Period.

Thus, we're creating reasons for a decision that RAC dumb****ed his way into.

[whoman69]

As poorly as he played, that was still Drew Brees out there. You either put pressure on a shaky QB or ask your defense to get Drew Brees on a three and out. It was the best call under the circumstances.

[whoman69]

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

I'd happily make a lateral move at QB provided the next QB's treatment was equal to his actual skill. Cassel is treated with kids' gloves as if he's a 1st round draft pick QBOTF. He doesn't deserve that kind of leeway and never did.

If we make a lateral move to some journeyman QB, I'd be happy as long as the front office recognized this new QB as a stop gap. That's what journeyman QB's are for.

We've had a stop gap pretty much our whole history.

[FAX]

Originally Posted by whoman69

We've had a stop gap pretty much our whole history.

Not always. But it's damn close.

If you count DeBerg and Montana as stop-gaps which they kinda were, I guess, that pretty much leaves you with Lenny and Green ... and Elvis, maybe ... although I'd count him, too.

FAX

[pimpchief]

Originally Posted by tk13

Crennel wasn't just aiming at Pioli, he was also aiming higher. That's right, Roger Goodell himself. He didn't trust the replacement officials to properly call a touchdown, so he forced them to officiate an extra period. It was a giant middle finger to Goodell to get the deal done. Truly brilliant.

Best post ever.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by milkman

This is all well thought out and thought provoking.

But if I'm Romeo Crennel, would I rather punt the ball away, hope the defense makes one more stop, get it back and put the ball in Cassel's hands for a handful of plays, or would I rather take the chance that he can make one play.

Speaking for myself, I'm going to take the chance that he might make one play, rather than hope, if he does get it back, that he can make a series of plays.

I agree but the clock was not in our favor. Assuming the defense does stop the Saints with enough time now you're asking Cassel to make a play in a short period of time which I think we know is not a favorable situation. At least in OT Cassel has time. We have to remember who our QB is and how he performs under pressure.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by petegz28

I agree but the clock was not in our favor. Assuming the defense does stop the Saints with enough time now you're asking Cassel to make a play in a short period of time which I think we know is not a favorable situation. At least in OT Cassel has time. We have to remember who our QB is and how he performs under pressure.

Huh?

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by milkman

Huh?

I'm saying that there was no time to recover from a Cassel **** up at the end of regulation. And the odds he ****ed up were just as good if not better than the odds that he wins the game.

[FAX]

Originally Posted by petegz28

I'm saying that there was no time to recover from a Cassel **** up at the end of regulation. And the odds he ****ed up were just as good if not better than the odds that he wins the game.

I think I see your point, Mr. petgz28. 1 play equals 1 potential CasselDisaster. However, if we punt, hold them, then get the ball back at ... say ... our 40, we're talking about requiring at least half a dozen plays which equals 897 potential CasselDisasters or a net savings of 896 total CasselDisasters.

Is that what you mean?

FAX

[milkman]

Originally Posted by petegz28

I'm saying that there was no time to recover from a Cassel **** up at the end of regulation. And the odds he ****ed up were just as good if not better than the odds that he wins the game.

The way you posted that, I didn't understand at all.

We are in agreement.

The odds that Cassel would **** up at the end of regulation with time running out and needing to make several plays to drive into FG range were far larger than hoping that he wouldn't **** up one play to extend a drive that already had them near FG range.