Pete Prisco: You Play to Win the Game

[RJ]

Another columnist chimes in on Herm's decision making. From CBSsports.com:



http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/features/writers/prisco/grades

[Bowser]

Prisco nailed it.

[Chiefnj2]

No surprise, but I completely disagree with Prisco.

Herm took chances. Herm was aggressive.

Herm played to win. 4 words you don't usually see together Herm - played - to - win. He didn't play not to lose, and he didn't play for the tie, he played [dramatic pause] to win [dramatic pause] the game.

I'll take an aggressive loss from Herm any day of the week over what happened in Indy.

[FAX]

Yep.

FAX

[jAZ]

The one thing I will sort-of agree with, is this.

If Herm doesn't cut the kicker we have, and sign someone else for next week's game, then the decision to go for it on 4th and 1 at the 23 was STUPID.

If our kicker isn't good enough to attempt a 40 yard game tying FG, then he needs to be cut ASAP.

[FAX]

No surprise, but I completely disagree with Prisco.

Herm took chances. Herm was aggressive.

Herm played to win. 4 words you don't usually see together Herm - played - to - win. He didn't play not to lose, and he didn't play for the tie, he played [dramatic pause] to win [dramatic pause] the game.

I'll take an aggressive loss from Herm any day of the week over what happened in Indy.

The man is bi-polar. He is manic. Sure, he needs to drop the concept of waiting for the enemy to fail rather than trying to win, Mr. Chiefnj2. But, in that game situation, the FG was the right call.

It's arguable, though, based on Raynor's situation. Maybe Herm saw something in Raynor's eyes that told him to forego the attempt. If true, do not - I repeat, do not - run a play the Raiders could recognize from the friggin' formation.

FAX

[HemiEd]

The truth sucks, but it is still the truth.

a kicker is on your NFL roster, he needs to kick in those situations, no matter how bad he has been on the day or the year. Tie the game up and go from there.

[Simply Red]

Sick of this crap! dumb Herm and dumb staff etc. Please leave town! Carl you too!



POWER TO THE PEOPLE! BITCHES!

[Katie]

Do you think Raynor is related to "He who must not be named?"

[Chiefnj2]

The man is bi-polar. He is manic. Sure, he needs to drop the concept of waiting for the enemy to fail rather than trying to win, Mr. Chiefnj2. But, in that game situation, the FG was the right call.


FAX

I respectfully disagree senior FAX. This team isn't going anywhere this year. Go for the win. If you can't get a yard at home you don't deserve to win the game.

[donkhater]

My guess is Herm thought he was imitating his good buddy Dungy on that play (get the first down, wind down the clock, kick the FG and prevent the other team from scoring the go-ahead FG or TD), but there are BIG differences in each circumstance.

Difference #1--Field postion. Had Manning not made his first down KC would have gotten the ball back at the 2 yard line and may ultimately had been forced to punt out of the endzone, resulting in good field position for a second attempt at another FG.

2. Dungy had all three TO's left. If Manning failed, KC wouldn't have been able to run out the clock prior to punting so the Colts would have good field position + plenty of time on the clock should they force KC to punt.

In the end, Herm has to go with his gut on this one. If he truly didn't have faith in Rayner, he shouldn't be on the roster this week--end of story. He might as well bring up Medlock from the practice squad (if he is still on it).

I have more of a problem with his play selection. The off-tackle dive has been one of the worst producing plays all season for this club. Nothing like sending a message to your club about being aggressive and then calling an ultra conservative play like that. If you decide to put the outcome of the game on this one play, it cannot be a play that is safe.

[DaKCMan AP]

Herm went for it and failed - he gets blasted.

If Herm kicks the FG and Rayner misses - he gets blasted.

If Herm kicks the FG and Rayner makes it and Oakland drives down and kicks the game winner - he gets blasted.

The guy can't win.

[KC Dan]

The guy can't win.
Agreed!

[Chiefnj2]

Herm went for it and failed - he gets blasted.

If Herm kicks the FG and Rayner misses - he gets blasted.

If Herm kicks the FG and Rayner makes it and Oakland drives down and kicks the game winner - he gets blasted.

The guy can't win.

Exactly. I can't stand Herm but don't see yesterday as being a bad Herm game.

[Megbert]

Herm is a sub .500 coach. The past few games have illustrated why this is.

[El Jefe]

Herm went for it and failed - he gets blasted.

If Herm kicks the FG and Rayner misses - he gets blasted.

If Herm kicks the FG and Rayner makes it and Oakland drives down and kicks the game winner - he gets blasted.

The guy can't win.

I concur.

[FAX]

I respectfully disagree senior FAX. This team isn't going anywhere this year. Go for the win. If you can't get a yard at home you don't deserve to win the game.

I understand, Mr. Chiefnj2, and I agree that Herm should be able to ask his offense to get him a yard. As I said, it's arguable either way. So, let's go for it. It's a coaching decision. I'll back it on that basis. But, if that's the case, don't telegraph your critical, game-on-the-line, super-important, two-timeout play to the friggin' enemy D.

FAX

[Chiefnj2]

I understand, Mr. Chiefnj2, and I agree that Herm should be able to ask his offense to get him a yard. As I said, it's arguable either way. So, let's go for it. It's a coaching decision. I'll back it on that basis. But, if that's the case, don't telegraph your critical, game-on-the-line, super-important, two-timeout play to the friggin' enemy D.

FAX

You go for subterfuge rather than running it with the guy who has had success the entire game behind the strongest part of the OL?

[stumppy]

The guy can't win.

Nailed it.

But he can lose.

[FAX]

Herm went for it and failed - he gets blasted.

If Herm kicks the FG and Rayner misses - he gets blasted.

If Herm kicks the FG and Rayner makes it and Oakland drives down and kicks the game winner - he gets blasted.

The guy can't win.

Ummm. Not really, Mr. DaKCMan AP. Get the first down. That's all. Get the first down and Herm's a hero, maybe we get a W, and the offense gains confidence in themselves and in their coaches.

One major contributing factor to the failure to pick it up was the play call/formation. At least, according to the Raider defensive players, that is.

We have lost 4 straight. We are losing home games in bunches. There is something very, very wrong with this team and the HC has to take the heat - it's part of the job he's paid to do.

FAX

[FAX]

You go for subterfuge rather than running it with the guy who has had success the entire game behind the strongest part of the OL?

I'm not making myself clear, Mr. Chiefnj2. I apologize. Honestly, I'm not hyping the fumblerooski. Here's where I'm coming from.

In the post-game interviews, the Raider defensive players said the play we ran on 4th and 1 had already been run 4 or 5 times that day. From the identical formation and using the identical motion. They said that, when they saw Gonzo in motion, the immediately knew which play was coming and they were ready for it. (They used, of course, much smaller words, but that's the gist.)

All I'm trying to communicate is that, when you are running your super important play, it might be a good idea not to run one that the defense had already seen, could recognize, and defend so easily as a result.

FAX

[Simply Red]

Herm "can't win" is exactly right.

[Chiefnj2]

I'm not making myself clear, Mr. Chiefnj2. I apologize. Honestly, I'm not hyping the fumblerooski. Here's where I'm coming from.

In the post-game interviews, the Raider defensive players said the play we ran on 4th and 1 had already been run 4 or 5 times that day. From the identical formation and using the identical motion. They said that, when they saw Gonzo in motion, the immediately knew which play was coming and they were ready for it. (They used, of course, much smaller words, but that's the gist.)

All I'm trying to communicate is that, when you are running your super important play, it might be a good idea not to run one that the defense had already seen, could recognize, and defend so easily as a result.

FAX

Would it make a difference if superior execution (albeit rare from this team) led to a 2+ yard gain on the previous 5 attempts?

[HemiEd]

All I'm trying to communicate is that, when you are running your super important play, it might be a good idea not to run one that the defense had already seen, could recognize, and defend so easily as a result.

FAX

Don't get things all twisted, it was the lines fault. :)

[FAX]

Would it make a difference if superior execution (albeit rare from this team) led to a 2+ yard gain on the previous 5 attempts?

Great point. I respect your view on this. I really do. And you know, one can imagine that that was, in fact, Solari's and Herm's idea, Mr. Chiefnj2. It worked before, so it will work again. And, if it had worked, it wouldn't be an issue today. I wanted them to make it and, as I said, Herm should be able to count on a yard from his offense. Never mind that Herm admitted that Kolby was tired by that point in the game and that we were, essentially, telling the defense what we were going to do in advance. Nevertheless, Herm should know what play to call when we need a yard. He should know what his players can and cannot do. He should have one friggin' play saved back that can guarantee him a friggin' yard in critical game-time situations.

Your points are well taken, however. To me, that play call speaks to predictability, low risk, simplification, and unimaginative decision making on the offensive side of the ball. I don't know why I would expect anything else.

FAX

[Calcountry]

The one thing I will sort-of agree with, is this.

If Herm doesn't cut the kicker we have, and sign someone else for next week's game, then the decision to go for it on 4th and 1 at the 23 was STUPID.

If our kicker isn't good enough to attempt a 40 yard game tying FG, then he needs to be cut ASAP.I thought the same thing. Either that, or he hurt himself on the previous kick.

Either way, he needs to be replaced now.

Aint that the Chiefs you know and love? Draft a kicker in the draft, and we are 2 kickers removed from him in the first season.

Heck, Morton Anderson is still nailing 35 yarders. We are 4 kickers removed from when he wasn't good enough for us.

[dirk digler]

Herm went for it and failed - he gets blasted.

If Herm kicks the FG and Rayner misses - he gets blasted.

If Herm kicks the FG and Rayner makes it and Oakland drives down and kicks the game winner - he gets blasted.

The guy can't win.

1. True
2. True
3. False
4. True. He never has won anything

[DJJasonp]

The truth sucks, but it is still the truth.

Amen. Amen. Amen.

There's a time and place for "play to win the game".....and this was not it.

Not with a paper mache offensive line and a winded running back.

You kick the FG

[HemiEd]

Amen. Amen. Amen.

There's a time and place for "play to win the game".....and this was not it.

Not with a paper mache offensive line and a winded running back.

You kick the FG

I know some on here say it is due to hindsight, but I was screaming at the time.
You have to give the kicker another shot, it may be the kick that sends his confidence soaring. Or, it could be affirmation that he needs to be cut.
I guess Herm already had his mind made up, but if he was going to cut him, why not do it after the Indy game?

[FAX]

I considered starting a new thread, but thought better of it since this is just a question. I'm really very curious and the play-by-play thing on NFL.com doesn't tell you.

How many passes were thrown into the endzone yesterday? Anyone recall?

Thanks in advance.

FAX

[Chiefnj2]

I considered starting a new thread, but thought better of it since this is just a question. I'm really very curious and the play-by-play thing on NFL.com doesn't tell you.

How many passes were thrown into the endzone yesterday? Anyone recall?

Thanks in advance.

FAX

I recall two semi-long balls thrown into the endzone. One to TG on the right sideline- big overthrow. One to DB who got a hand on it, but got hit by two guys.

[FAX]

I recall two semi-long balls thrown into the endzone. One to TG on the right sideline- big overthrow. One to DB who got a hand on it, but got hit by two guys.

Thanks, Mr. Chiefnj2. Nice to know that we took a shot or two.

FAX

[ferrarispider95]

I won't disagree with going for it, after the last couple games that Raynor has had. BUT, I didn't like the timeout and challenge.

They should have made the decision and ran up and snapped it. They showed the formation they were going to run and than gave the raiders time to scheme it after the timeout and challenge.

[Thig Lyfe]

Ummm. Not really, Mr. DaKCMan AP. Get the first down. That's all. Get the first down and Herm's a hero, maybe we get a W, and the offense gains confidence in themselves and in their coaches.

One major contributing factor to the failure to pick it up was the play call/formation. At least, according to the Raider defensive players, that is.

We have lost 4 straight. We are losing home games in bunches. There is something very, very wrong with this team and the HC has to take the heat - it's part of the job he's paid to do.

FAX

Bravo :clap:

[Rausch]

I know some on here say it is due to hindsight, but I was screaming at the time.
You have to give the kicker another shot, it may be the kick that sends his confidence soaring. Or, it could be affirmation that he needs to be cut.
I guess Herm already had his mind made up, but if he was going to cut him, why not do it after the Indy game?

It's important to snap your spine one crushing loss at a time...

[kcxiv]

No surprise, but I completely disagree with Prisco.

Herm took chances. Herm was aggressive.

Herm played to win. 4 words you don't usually see together Herm - played - to - win. He didn't play not to lose, and he didn't play for the tie, he played [dramatic pause] to win [dramatic pause] the game.

I'll take an aggressive loss from Herm any day of the week over what happened in Indy.
He took a chance at the wrong damned time. He always does that. You dont take that chance right there. It was just bad.

I agree that i dont mind to see something aggressive but at that time in the game it was the wrong time.

Herm played to win at the wrong time. There was plenty of time on the clock still. He had no problem putting the game in the hands of his defense against Indy, but he had a problem against the Raiders? Even if the Raiders do score, they had 2 time outs left that would have helped them out big time.

Herm=deer in the headlights. He constantly makes the wrong choice during a game. Monday through Friday he's great, Sunday he sucks.

[HemiEd]

It's important to snap your spine one crushing loss at a time...

Same old song keeps getting older each time. Are you ready to deal with the Raiders winning 9 in a row against the Chiefs?

Not me, fire his ass now.

[KCJohnny]

The one thing I will sort-of agree with, is this.

If Herm doesn't cut the kicker we have, and sign someone else for next week's game, then the decision to go for it on 4th and 1 at the 23 was STUPID.

If our kicker isn't good enough to attempt a 40 yard game tying FG, then he needs to be cut ASAP.

That may be happening as we speak. Anyway, 3 would tie, 7 would win. you play to win the game.

[Calcountry]

Ummm. Not really, Mr. DaKCMan AP. Get the first down. That's all. Get the first down and Herm's a hero, maybe we get a W, and the offense gains confidence in themselves and in their coaches.

One major contributing factor to the failure to pick it up was the play call/formation. At least, according to the Raider defensive players, that is.

We have lost 4 straight. We are losing home games in bunches. There is something very, very wrong with this team and the HC has to take the heat - it's part of the job he's paid to do.

FAXFat chance Herm ever takes any responsibility for phuggin this team up. Neither will Carl.

[patteeu]

He took a chance at the wrong damned time. He always does that. You dont take that chance right there. It was just bad.

I agree that i dont mind to see something aggressive but at that time in the game it was the wrong time.

Herm played to win at the wrong time. There was plenty of time on the clock still. He had no problem putting the game in the hands of his defense against Indy, but he had a problem against the Raiders? Even if the Raiders do score, they had 2 time outs left that would have helped them out big time.

Herm=deer in the headlights. He constantly makes the wrong choice during a game. Monday through Friday he's great, Sunday he sucks.

If Herm had put Rayner in to kick that field goal after he'd missed 3 times in the past 2 weeks and he'd botched it yet again, the criticism would have been even more thunderous.

He had a RB who'd gained 150 yards already and a kicker who'd missed 3 of his last 5 FG attempts including some very makeable shanks. It was only 1 yard. Herm did the right thing, IMO.