I blame the missed FG on Parcells

[DMX690]

Ahhhh - if he gives them love and attention, nurtures them, provides them with food, clothing and shelter, protects them from harm and raises them to be fine young men, always remembering to praise them when it is deserved, then they will repay him with made FG's .............

BS - this is football and Bill ain't their father. If the kickers don't have confidence enough to make FG's then they don't deserve to be here.

By the way, did it ever occur to anyone that Suisham is just an average kicker - plain and simple? He wasn't even particulary accurate in college. Seems to me that we are looking for BS excuses when the simple truth is that we were forced to use a kicker that Parcells didn't really want to keep anyway, and he showed why.

Good point... Suisham is just not that good. That's why Vandy better be kicking this Sunday night or i can't bare to watch Suisham miss another gimme field goal.

 

[silver]

Ahhhh - if he gives them love and attention, nurtures them, provides them with food, clothing and shelter, protects them from harm and raises them to be fine young men, always remembering to praise them when it is deserved, then they will repay him with made FG's .............

BS - this is football and Bill ain't their father. If the kickers don't have confidence enough to make FG's then they don't deserve to be here.

By the way, did it ever occur to anyone that Suisham is just an average kicker - plain and simple? He wasn't even particulary accurate in college. Seems to me that we are looking for BS excuses when the simple truth is that we were forced to use a kicker that Parcells didn't really want to keep anyway, and he showed why.

I guess when you got lemons you make lemonade. I remember our kicker in 2003 with the game vs the Giants. He wasn't any better than Suisham, but Parcells had confidence in him and sent him out there to kick a long FG to send the game into OT and also to win it later. Kickers are a different breed, they don't respond well to mind games like LB's and TE's (BP's specialties)

 

[DMX690]

I guess when you got lemons you make lemonade. I remember our kicker in 2003 with the game vs the Giants. He wasn't any better than Suisham, but Parcells had confidence in him and sent him out there to kick a long FG to send the game into OT and also to win it later. Kickers are a different breed, they don't respond well to mind games like LB's and TE's (BP's specialties)

Well that's because... Parcell had no choice because there was 3 sec left in the game. To have confidence in a player. The player needs to show he has confidence in himself, which clearly Suisham doesn't.

 

[silver]

One thing we can all agree (other than suisham outta be shot) is that we miss Hoffman a lot. The guy made kickers outta elementary school P.E. teachers.

 

[Stautner]

I guess when you got lemons you make lemonade. I remember our kicker in 2003 with the game vs the Giants. He wasn't any better than Suisham, but Parcells had confidence in him and sent him out there to kick a long FG to send the game into OT and also to win it later. Kickers are a different breed, they don't respond well to mind games like LB's and TE's (BP's specialties)

I don't see the mind games. The fact is that Parcells makes decisions based on the situation on the field as well as how he feels about the kicker. When we went for it on 4th down he may have done the same even if Vandy had been there (almost certainly after Vandy's preseason performance). In the 2003 game you refer to, I don't see that Parcells had another choice - even poor 60/40 odds on a FG are better than the odds on completing a long pass in the end zone.

But the bottom line is that kickers have to earn the confidence of the coach. It doesn't work the other way around - NFL teams can't afford to take on a project kicker who they feel can do well if they can help him build confidence.

 

[DMX690]

One thing we can all agree (other than suisham outta be shot) is that we miss Hoffman a lot. The guy made kickers outta elementary school P.E. teachers.

That's when Jerry wanted to be cheap with kickers. Now, we actually spend millions on a veteran Kicker. I want to see the that idiot kicker kick. I don't care how he looks in practice. He can't do any worse.

 

[Stautner]

That's when Jerry wanted to be cheap with kickers. Now, we actually spend millions on a veteran Kicker. I want to see the that idiot kicker kick. I don't care how he looks in practice. He can't do any worse.

This is bogus - hoffman was fired long before we brought in a high priced kicker.

It is interesting to note, however, that we seemed to have fewer kicking issues when Hoffman was here than we have since he left.

I do want to make one point though. Most seasons a team really only has a couple of games that are decided by a missed or made FG. Last year was an exception - we had about 5-6 games that came down to that, most of which went against us. In other words, I beleive that in most seasons the FG problems we had last year would have seemed much less significant. Hell, we've been surviving with 70-75% FG kickers for years, including the Super Bowl years of the 90's, and though we have known all along that kicking wasn't a strong suit, last year was the first time it became a dramatic problem.

 

[LeonDixson]

It's playing for points. BP had it in his head that we HAD to get 3 out of that drive. You could say be aggressive and throw for it, but then if Drew's sacked or throws another pick, we get nada. It turned we got nada, but we played for the FG.

I don't think anyone should be surprised that BP played for the FG. It's what he does. On 3rd and 8 or less, he probably throws for it, 3rd and 13... play for the FG. I'd do it too.

You are probably right that he was playing for the field goal in that instance. However, I'd be willing to bet that a majority of 3rd and very long situations, BP calls a run or a very short pass play even when we are not in field goal situations.

Put me down in the group that says "go for it". I get sick of seeing them running when it's 3rd and long yardage. It would be interesting to see the stats on what his tendency is in those situations, but I'm way too lazy to go back and chart the plays for the last 3 years.

 

[Chuck 54]

Many may see this as nit-picking, but I blame the missed FG on Parcells.
After Witten's penalty to negate the TD, we were facing something like 3rd and 13. Okay so we decide to call a run play on 3rd down. I actually agree with that, because with that much yardage to go, a run play makes sense to set up a FG. But why did the coaches call the play to be a run to the right?

All that run-right does is put the FG on the right hashmark if the first down is not made. With a rookie kicker kickeing, and one you have little confidence in, the smart play would have been to run to the center so the FG attemplt is placed in the middle of the goal posts on 4th down. Instead a run-right is called and the following kick (from the right) went straight and hit the right post and was no-good.

Therefore I blame this miss on Parcells AND ONLY Parcells because the previous play should have been a middle run. Even if Parcells may have not called the play himself, he sohuld have overriden it if someone else called it, since Parcells has publically reserved the right to have final say on what offensive calls get made.

**

3rd and 13 is not exactly 3rd and 25...I disagree...when you have T.O., Glenn, and Witten, you should be passing on 3rd and 13 to keep the scoring drive alive...you can also dump it short and pick up yards.

I'd be willing to bet the odds of converting 3rd and 13 are much higher when passing than when running...running on 3rd and 13 in the red zone is a "give up" play, imo.

 

[Stautner]

3rd and 13 is not exactly 3rd and 25...I disagree...when you have T.O., Glenn, and Witten, you should be passing on 3rd and 13 to keep the scoring drive alive...you can also dump it short and pick up yards.

I'd be willing to bet the odds of converting 3rd and 13 are much higher when passing than when running...running on 3rd and 13 in the red zone is a "give up" play, imo.

The odds of losing yardage and pushing the FG distance into a tougher category are also much higher with a pass .... it's all relative and all subject to whatever Parcells feels best about at the time. Parcells has earned a little latitude on these kinds of decisions.

 

[Doomsday]

I dont think you call plays in the 3rd quarter thinking what hash mark someone is kicking a lousy 36 yard FG from. Yea the object is to get the ball a bit closer, but you are also hoping to catch the defense over committing to the pass so you can pick up the first down. The mistake he made was not taking Vanderjagt instead. If you look at his history he has stunk it up in preseason for several years now and been a rock in the regular season. He was brought in for a reason, Id rather take a chance on him then a practice wonder who you know you cant rely on. Screw the kickoffs, the 10 yards isnt nearly as costly as the 3 points we miss out on every game.

 

[DipChit]

As far as calling a running play on 3rd and very long, I dont really have an opinion on the best way to handle it.

I'll just say that I think the NFL Head Coaches Handbook that they give to every new coach makes it pretty clear that they're supposed to call a draw play in that situation. It's listed inbetween the paragraphs that say you shouldnt defer til the 2nd half and the one that mentions the proper procedure on how congratulate each other at mid-field after the game.

Must be.. cause it's one of the most predictable down/distance play calls in NFL history.

 

[ghst187]

When did Parcells become our kicker?

Well he became directly responsible once he fired Hoffman...

 

[Stautner]

As far as calling a running play on 3rd and very long, I dont really have an opinion on the best way to handle it.

I'll just say that I think the NFL Head Coaches Handbook that they give to every new coach makes it pretty clear that they're supposed to call a draw play in that situation. It's listed inbetween the paragraphs that say you shouldnt defer til the 2nd half and the one that mentions the proper procedure on how congratulate each other at mid-field after the game.

Must be.. cause it's one of the most predictable down/distance play calls in NFL history.

This is a great point - many on here act as if this is merely a predictable quirk in our offensive play calling. It goes on all the time with virtually every team. I assume the idea is that the defense is looking to prevent a first down pass, so the draw provides some opportunity to get a first down against a spread out defense while still preserving or aiding the field position for the FG attempt.

 

[DMX690]

Well he became directly responsible once he fired Hoffman...

It is too much to ask, for a kicker to be able to make a 30 yard field goal on a regular bases.

 

[jackrussell]

Many may see this as nit-picking, but I blame the missed FG on Parcells.
After Witten's penalty to negate the TD, we were facing something like 3rd and 13. Okay so we decide to call a run play on 3rd down. I actually agree with that, because with that much yardage to go, a run play makes sense to set up a FG. But why did the coaches call the play to be a run to the right?

All that run-right does is put the FG on the right hashmark if the first down is not made. With a rookie kicker kickeing, and one you have little confidence in, the smart play would have been to run to the center so the FG attemplt is placed in the middle of the goal posts on 4th down. Instead a run-right is called and the following kick (from the right) went straight and hit the right post and was no-good.

Therefore I blame this miss on Parcells AND ONLY Parcells because the previous play should have been a middle run. Even if Parcells may have not called the play himself, he sohuld have overriden it if someone else called it, since Parcells has publically reserved the right to have final say on what offensive calls get made.

**

Dang. After reading this little diddy..........I'm sorry for missing your other 715 posts.

 

[peplaw06]

Yes, maybe at 10-10, but he does it all the time.

I think the players would like it too, have some fun, ... it is a game.

There are three constants in life.... Death, taxes, and Bill Parcells coached teams will play conservatively. BP plays for field position and points. ESPECIALLY on 3rd and long. You could bet the house on a run on 3rd and long. He talks about the offense getting to 3rd and manageable. Anything over 8-10 yards for him isn't manageable. Like it or not, it's BP.

And he's been successful doing it. This isn't Madden, it's BP's job. A sack on 3rd and long could lose you 10 yards or more of field position. An interception on 3rd and long... which is more likely because they're going to drop 7-8 in coverage... is devastating. The thing BP has resigned himself to is the fact that if your offense is in that situation, they have probably made a mistake to get there. He's not going to make the situation worse by trying to do too much. It's just the way it is. Not saying I agree with it, but then again, I'm not an NFL coach.

 

[AdamJT13]

There are three constants in life.... Death, taxes, and Bill Parcells coached teams will play conservatively. BP plays for field position and points. ESPECIALLY on 3rd and long. You could bet the house on a run on 3rd and long. He talks about the offense getting to 3rd and manageable. Anything over 8-10 yards for him isn't manageable. Like it or not, it's BP.

And he's been successful doing it. This isn't Madden, it's BP's job. A sack on 3rd and long could lose you 10 yards or more of field position. An interception on 3rd and long... which is more likely because they're going to drop 7-8 in coverage... is devastating. The thing BP has resigned himself to is the fact that if your offense is in that situation, they have probably made a mistake to get there. He's not going to make the situation worse by trying to do too much. It's just the way it is. Not saying I agree with it, but then again, I'm not an NFL coach.

Last year, whenever we were in the red zone and faced third-and-4 or longer, we passed the ball EVERY SINGLE TIME. That included passes on third-and-10, third-and-17 and third-and-18.

 

[ghst187]

It is too much to ask, for a kicker to be able to make a 30 yard field goal on a regular bases.

I think you meant this in the form of a question....and the answer seems to be an overwhelming YES.
As if it were consolation...a bunch of kickers missed makeable FGs this past week, including Nugent out of Ohio St, who was easily one of the best and most heralded kickers coming out of college in recent years.
What happened to the good old days with Morten and Gary Anderson, guys like that who were just automatic under 40?
Maybe its me, but it used to seem like anything under 40 yards in the pros was nearly automatic...
Its been one nightmare after another for us in the kicking game. Not many teams have been as snakebitten by it as we have but for certain we aren't the only ones frustrated with our kicker/s.
I tell you though, and I said it once the offseason started, I would gone HARD after Neil Rackers, Nedney, Vinateri, Longwell, and/or Mare. Vjerk would not have been on the list other than a last resort. Jerry Jones didn't seem to have many issues ponying up a lot of money for FAs, I failed to understand why he was reluctant to open up the wallet and do what it took to get one of the guys I mentioned when it clearly cost us so many games last year and in the past 10. I would imagine that if we were willing to pay 3-5 million for a kicker that we could've gotten any of the FA kickers we wanted, including Vinateri (who apparently can kick with a broken foot, while our idiot kicker can't kick with a bruised ego). And we'd have to be braindead not to have put Vanderjerk low on our list of kickers we'd like to have. It would've been worth it to offer the Cards draft picks and/or a player or two to acquire Rackers. Heck, who is more important to have.....a backup LB and STer or a kicker who is money?
I hope to heck Vandershank comes around soon and has a great season, but I thought and still think that we made a gross error in judgment regarding kickers this past offseason.

 

[peplaw06]

Last year, whenever we were in the red zone and faced third-and-4 or longer, we passed the ball EVERY SINGLE TIME. That included passes on third-and-10, third-and-17 and third-and-18.

But isn't it different when we're in the Red Zone?? If we take a sack there, we can still kick the FG. The problem comes when you're in borderline FG range. When we're in the Red Zone, BP probably hammers the "don't force a throw if it's not there" then lets Bledsoe throw it. But if we get sacked, we still have a shot at 3.