Week 18 game thread?

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,973
Here
Playing for a win is different than playing for a TD. Of course the Raiders minimized risk, and it was going to come down to a long-ish FG.
I’d wager if he got stuffed there at the end they just let the clock run. It gets too risky from that distance.
 

BigMike

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 26, 2000
23,250
Numbnuts Collinsworth begging for the tie for most of the game, and in particular in Overtime was a very bad look for the league
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,973
Here
Numbnuts Collinsworth begging for the tie for most of the game, and in particular in Overtime was a very bad look for the league
He said as a coach it was the right decision for your team at a certain point.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,339
I mean they had to at first. Too much time to go three and out.
They threw on 3rd and 8 from their own 44 with 2:22 left. If they wanted a tie they could have run up the middle again, clock goes down to 2:00, punt it deep, and the Chargers go conservative and they're both in. They clearly were never trying to tie.
 

Pablo's TB Lover

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 10, 2017
5,999
I mean they had to at first. Too much time to go three and out.
The Raiders also ran for 174 yards and passed for around the same amount. Not like they couldn't get first downs this way. If they only wanted a few first downs, running it would be the obvious route to get enough firsts while killing the clock.
 

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
19,882
Henderson, NV
I don’t even understand why they wouldn’t try to win. No one wants to go to KC if they can avoid it.
All San Diego had to do is stop a run they knew was coming and they didn’t.
Yeah, but they might have thought San Diego would take another timeout on a stop to try a punt block. And instead of letting the clock run at the end they kicked in retaliation.
It wasn’t the TO, it was the atrocious SD run defense.
They should probably move the team back after that disaster.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,280
Numbnuts Collinsworth begging for the tie for most of the game, and in particular in Overtime was a very bad look for the league
Eh, I don’t think so. It’s a weird quirk, but it made the game more compelling and surely kept viewers watching. I mean, the Steelers were only in that position because they tied, and didn’t beat the Lions, anyways.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,973
Here
They threw on 3rd and 8 from their own 44 with 2:22 left. If they wanted a tie they could have run up the middle again, clock goes down to 2:00, punt it deep, and the Chargers go conservative and they're both in. They clearly were never trying to tie.
Or San Diego calls timeout and tries to score themselves.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,787
Numbnuts Collinsworth begging for the tie for most of the game, and in particular in Overtime was a very bad look for the league

I thought he was much more fun than usual and maybe he still has animus against Pitt from his playing days
 

Pablo's TB Lover

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 10, 2017
5,999
If Bisaccia took a tie and the Raiders lost, never mind got their doors blown off in KC next week, he not only wouldn't have gotten the Raiders job fulltime, but he'd also never get another HC opportunity again. He had to play to win.
Nevermind that I saw how animated Carr was after an incompletion on the final drive. Is this interim guy going to tell him to frigging settle for a tie?
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,605
High likelihood that the Pats are going to have to beat the three best teams in the AFC if they want to make the Super Bowl. Good luck, fellas…
I think Kaepernick's playoff record of 181 yards rushing by a QB is safe, but Allen could break 100 Saturday night.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,484
Oregon
I’m clearly not the only one.
I asked if it was Carr who said the strategy changed. That was answered.

Then I asked if he had indicated how the strategy changed. That was answered.

I don't know what is confusing you about this
 

Remagellan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I thought he was much more fun than usual and maybe he still has animus against Pitt from his playing days
I think he also realized the matchups would have been better than they are now.

Raiders at KC--old school rivalry
Pats at Bengals--Bill versus a young gunslinging QB
Chargers at Bills--two mega-talents at QB squaring off.

Beats
Steelers at KC--Ben on his last legs getting blown out by the Chiefs
Pats at Bills--Third round of a matchup we've already seen twice in the past few weeks.
Raiders at Bengals--Memories of what? Stan Fritts running against John Matuszak and company?
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
20,648
I’m clearly not the only one.
All you're saying is that the strategy changed (as voiced by Carr), but we don't know how it changed. Maybe they were getting ready to pass, but then because of the TO decided to run. Or they were going to pitch to the left, but decided to run up the middle during the TO.