Originally Posted by Chromeburn (Post 97772)

Wouldn't scheme choice, effective gameplan development, and good play calling be considered positive effects towards gameday results?

Originally Posted by rcubed (Post 97777)

in game adjustments dumbass.

Originally Posted by Pez (Post 97788)

At the end of the day dam, it they had converted you might be saying that "going for the win on 4th down is what gave us this division", vs "Going for the win against Houston the first time is costing the Colts a shot at the division right now, for example"

You can go for it on 4th down. If you miss it's a horrible idea. If you make it it's brilliant. These are the debts a coach must pay.

Originally Posted by omahacolt (Post 97792)

the dude is trump. he will never admit he is wrong.

just make fun of him and move along

Originally Posted by omahacolt (Post 97792)

the dude is trump. he will never admit he is wrong.

just make fun of him and move along

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 97799)

All of those things can be and are regularly erased both in the positive and negative direction by player performance, so no. Examples from last game: the Autry sack where he jailbroke up the middle, the playcall on either side was irrelevant because of player performance. On the opposite side of the spectrum, any drop.



Still require player performance, dumbass.



To me, in the situation, the smart play was the tie. Reich's aggressiveness on 4th downs also potentially cost the Colts the @ Jaguars game. Don't get me wrong, I prefer the aggressiveness in most situations on 4th down (I specifically didn't bring up the Jaguars game initially because I mostly agreed with the decisions, even though I thought the calls were underwhelming in a couple of cases), but I tend to like to play the percentages with 4th downs, and that 4th down against Houston was very low percentage. A punt virtually locked a tie, while a failure to convert was almost assuredly a loss, and a conversion was maybe win/more likely still tie. To me, you're less than 50/50 on that 4th and 4 for getting a more positive result by going for it than punting, probably more like 25/75.



I don't have anything to admit to being wrong about.

Also, I'd like to point out that several people here have compared you to Trump.

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish (Post 97809)

But when we making fun of him, we are derailing threads?

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 97799)

All of those things can be and are regularly erased both in the positive and negative direction by player performance, so no. Examples from last game: the Autry sack where he jailbroke up the middle, the playcall on either side was irrelevant because of player performance. On the opposite side of the spectrum, any drop.

Originally Posted by Chromeburn (Post 97826)

But, for example, what if the coach gameplans the strength out of the opposition. Belichick often effectively neutralizes a teams strength, especially on offense. That is coaching, it isn't happenstance the players do it. They still have to follow through and accomplish it, but the design is by the coach that they follow.

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 97807)

Coaches get paid to build player performance and execution. Confidence to perform at this level can be an acquired trait, which can be produced by a coach known as a "whisperer". Stop ignoring the psychological benefits of a competent coach who understands how to build confidence.

Originally Posted by omahacolt (Post 97848)

Guys,

Dam backed a shitty coach. It’s over. He will never concede to being wrong no matter what. We all know he is wrong. He knows he is wrong. There isn’t a single person on the planet that would agree with him.

But it is done. He went all in on one of the worst coaches in history and he doesn’t have the balls to admit he was wrong. Dam lacks integrity as a human. He is a coward. To his core, as a man, he is a weak and shitty person. That is simply who he is.

He is damold trump.