Todd Bowles is a fucking fraud

[Rocker]

Bowles has lived and died by his aggressiveness for the entirety of his professional coaching career. This time he got burnt. Badly. Does that make him a bad coach? Not in my eyes. Does that make him a bad fit for this team? Again, not in my eyes. Does my emotion dictate change is in order? Yeah, kinda.

The benefits of hindsight aside, wasn't a fan of the call when it happened. I was fully prepared for an OT period. But you live and die by the blitz in a Bowles scheme. This time, it didn't work; and history will shit on him for the call. Right or wrong.

[MJW]

Bowles has lived and died by his aggressiveness for the entirety of his professional coaching career. This time he got burnt. Badly. Does that make him a bad coach? Not in my eyes. Does that make him a bad fit for this team? Again, not in my eyes. Does my emotion dictate change is in order? Yeah, kinda.

The benefits of hindsight aside, wasn't a fan of the call when it happened. I was fully prepared for an OT period. But you live and die by the blitz in a Bowles scheme. This time, it didn't work; and history will shit on him for the call. Right or wrong.

I get it. Bowles blitzes. That's his deal. It's often worked to great effect. But it's not like he blitzes EVERY play. I think I read he blitzed (defined as more than 4 rushers) 43% of the time this season.

It's just really hard to convince me this wasn't the time for the other 57%. Any way you slice it, we ended up with a safety one-on-one on the league's best wide receiver running free down the field. Against a line that had been stoning the blitz all day. With a white-hot quarterback who is also the league's best when blitzed.

It shouldn't define his coaching career. He's still a good coach. But it's going to be really hard to convince me this was a good gamble.

[Rocker]

Bowles has lived and died by his aggressiveness for the entirety of his professional coaching career. This time he got burnt. Badly. Does that make him a bad coach? Not in my eyes. Does that make him a bad fit for this team? Again, not in my eyes. Does my emotion dictate change is in order? Yeah, kinda.

The benefits of hindsight aside, wasn't a fan of the call when it happened. I was fully prepared for an OT period. But you live and die by the blitz in a Bowles scheme. This time, it didn't work; and history will shit on him for the call. Right or wrong.

I get it. Bowles blitzes. That's his deal. It's often worked to great effect. But it's not like he blitzes EVERY play. I think I read he blitzed (defined as more than 4 rushers) 43% of the time this season.

It's just really hard to convince me this wasn't the time for the other 57%. Any way you slice it, we ended up with a safety one-on-one on the league's best wide receiver running free down the field. Against a line that had been stoning the blitz all day. With a white-hot quarterback who is also the league's best when blitzed.

It shouldn't define his coaching career. He's still a good coach. But it's going to be really hard to convince me this was a good gamble.

We're arguing the same point from differing perspectives. Personally, I believe he's earned the right to be our DC for as long as he wants. However, I understand and can agree(to an extent) with those that think that call should be the end of his tenure here. It's a tough, tough pill to swallow. We all wanted more. It falls on his shoulders that we didn't get another opportunity to move on. I get all of that. On the other hand, I'd say that there's maybe, MAYBE two or three coordinators on that side of the ball that can call a game (with these players) the way that Todd can.

[Kress]

If we wanted to gamble, we go for two. We weren't taking our rent money to the track, until Bowles did.

[nybf]

Deep down, that would have been "no risk it, no biscuit." I was quickly going through that argument in my head. Part of me really wanted it. Part of me really did not. Kinda like a gummy from lilbj.

[Kress]

Deep down, that would have been "no risk it, no biscuit." I was quickly going through that argument in my head. Part of me really wanted it. Part of me really did not. Kinda like a gummy from lilbj.

I know. To be honest, in the moment, I was leaning toward doing it. We were so beat up, and save for the turnovers, we had been thoroughly beaten all game long. I thought we needed to try to end it right there because I had less than 50/50 faith in overtime.

Edit: As it turns out, we did end it right there, because Todd Bowles is a fucking fraud. Or so I hear.

[CantonJester]

If we wanted to gamble, we go for two. We weren't taking our rent money to the track, until Bowles did.

This has been my point since the actual play occurred.

Nope. Still not over it.

[Monero]

I'm getting more bitter over that playcall not less as more time passes. Bowles called it. Arians approved it. Not a single soul believes it was the right call and then Arians threw his players under the bus once again by blaming them for execution instead of correctly assigning blame to himself and Bowles for letting that play hit the field at all. Bowles also chose to blitz Stafford pretty often in this game despite all the analytics pointing towards the Rams being the best offense in the league vs the Blitz. He killed us in the first game this year, and he did it once again. Maybe we still lose in OT, but it would've been a better loss than what we experienced. Brady had more pressure in this game and his oline won less vs the pass rush than Mahomes did in the Super Bowl and still got us back from being behind 27-3 only to have Bowles and Arians flush that effort down the toilet. If Bowles isn't hired elsewhere he has to go in my opinion.

[Dread]

I don't have a problem with being aggressive with the play call there.

But when you see the confusion and your defense not lined up to execute the play call then fucking call a time out

[mdb1958]

Winfield spent a whole second looking back - end of story.

[mdb1958]

I know it's hard after spending hours and hours speaking so highly of him - get over it.

[Monero]

Why is a defense being called which requires a non-elite athlete safety to guard the best WR in football one on one in a scenario where the opposing team needs a FG and we're trying to burn clock out for OT?

[Digital_Damage]

I don't have a problem with being aggressive with the playcall there.

But when you see the confusing and not your defense not lined up to execute then fucking call a time out

That would have been a neat trick....

[Dread]

Why is a defense being called which requires a non-elite athlete safety to guard the best WR in football one on one in a scenario where the opposing team needs a FG and we're trying to burn clock out for OT?

To defend the playcall; we had just called more conservative 2-high/man under defense the play before and given up a 20yd play AND let them get OOB to stop the clock. That was the real play the Bucs couldn't afford, but SMB fell down in coverage.

So now it's 1st and 10 at the Rams 44yd line with 35 seconds and no timeouts. In that situation almost any play that is tackled in bounds short of FG range (Matt Gay was hobbled w/ a pregame injury and already missed SHORT from 48yds) would mean the Rams would be in hurry up to get one more play off which couldn't be tackled in bounds.

So bringing pressure makes sense from that perspective. You force the ball out quick and short and put the Rams is hurry-up desperation (or they just kneel on it for OT).

The Winfield on Kupp match-up is tough to justify, but when you rush 7 defenders at the QB and the offense has 3 WRs you're going to get a Safety on a WR. With Kupp in the slot that is the way it works.

Winfield played that way too aggressive assuming the 7 man pressure would force a quick throw. But since not all of the defense was ready for whatever reason the 7 man pressure didn't get home and Stafford had time to see Winfield take a false step towards the LoS and got the throw off without a defender getting to him in time.

Really bad execution of an aggressive play call by Bowles.

I don't have an issue of the playcall, but the Rams had just got out of bounds on the previous play and thus the clock was stopped. Bowles/Bucs should've called timeout before that ball was snapped. There was obvious confusion in the front 7 just before the snap.

[Doctor]

There's this saying: "If it's a stupid idea but it works, it probably wasn't that stupid of an idea." I suppose the inverse is also true. "If it's a great idea but it fails miserably, it probably wasn't that great of an idea."

I hate that saying. Occasional good outcomes don't make bad decisions into good decisions. A guy who spends his rent money at the track but wins hasn't made a great decision.

I'd be open to Bowles convincing us that a zero blitz made sense. He's the friggin' DC. But he WOULD have to explain it in some way I'm not seeing, because right now it looks a lot like rent money at the track.

Passing from the 1 yard line in the Super Bowl comes to mind...

[Doctor]

Why is a defense being called which requires a non-elite athlete safety to guard the best WR in football one on one in a scenario where the opposing team needs a FG and we're trying to burn clock out for OT?

To defend the playcall; we had just called more conservative 2-high/man under defense the play before and given up a 20yd play AND let them get OOB to stop the clock. That was the real play the Bucs couldn't afford, but SMB fell down in coverage.

So now it's 1st and 10 at the Rams 44yd line with 35 seconds and no timeouts. In that situation almost any play that is tackled in bounds short of FG range (Matt Gay was hobbled w/ a pregame injury and already missed SHORT from 48yds) would mean the Rams would be in hurry up to get one more play off which couldn't be tackled in bounds.

So bringing pressure makes sense from that perspective. You force the ball out quick and short and put the Rams is hurry-up desperation (or they just kneel on it for OT).

The Winfield on Kupp match-up is tough to justify, but when you rush 7 defenders at the QB and the offense has 3 WRs you're going to get a Safety on a WR. With Kupp in the slot that is the way it works.

Winfield played that way too aggressive assuming the 7 man pressure would force a quick throw. But since not all of the defense was ready for whatever reason the 7 man pressure didn't get home and Stafford had time to see Winfield take a false step towards the LoS and got the throw off without a defender getting to him in time.

Really bad execution of an aggressive play call by Bowles.

I don't have an issue of the playcall, but the Rams had just got out of bounds on the previous play and thus the clock was stopped. Bowles/Bucs should've called timeout before that ball was snapped. There was obvious confusion in the front 7 just before the snap.

Excellent post. I agree, AWJ played that too aggressively likely thinking the rush could generate an underthrow he could pick off.

As White was explaining it, when executing a play like that you are usually going for a sack but even if you don't get it half the time it ends up being overthrown or underthrown because of the pressure. In the event somehow the QB still gets a great pass off under pressure you now have a 50/50 ball. Kupp won the 50/50.
I haven't heard a single defender blame the playcall because they know as unblocked rushers they were the ones that didn't execute on that play.

We can hindsight all we want, we'll spend all offseason doing so. Bowles and Arians explained their point of view pretty well. In their eyes, given how close they were, how much time was left, and how they were moving the ball they saw it as highly HIGHLY likely that they were going to get into FG range and beat us.

So instead of sitting back and waiting to lose on a FG, they took a risk on a blitz to either end regulation on a sack or better yet force a turnover figuring the worst thing that can happen is what was very likely to happen anyway.

[kaimaru]

My personal take was this. When we scored my first thought was "fuck, they are going to get into field goal range because we're going to try and win overtime before overtime on defense."

When Collinsworth questioned if we would go for two, I thought better than risking our defense. I felt better doing that then praying on what stupid defense he will be rolling out there. Honestly, if they were going to risk it, then why not? Why risk it on defense instead? Doesn't make any sense. I would have been happier with them going for two, and try to get a win by the skin of their teeth and fail than how we lost it.

I mean when I KNEW we were fucked before the extra point, that says something. I do not pretend I have high football IQ.

[nybf]

That wasn't a 50/50 ball hfs. I don't know if you're an actual idiot or if you think the longer you drag this out the more details you can change because people will forget.

But it looks like I was right from the start. Given enough time, you'll have them starting first and goal from the 1.

[Kress]

That wasn't a 50/50 ball hfs.

To be fair, while that thing was in the air, it was 50/50 as to whether Kupp would score or be dragged down from behind.

[Doctor]

That wasn't a 50/50 ball hfs. I don't know if you're an actual idiot or if you think the longer you drag this out the more details you can change because people will forget.

But it looks like I was right from the start. Given enough time, you'll have them starting first and goal from the 1.

Are you really so childish you are attacking me for words someone else said just so you can keep throwing your tantrum?

[Nobody]

We’re still interrogating this?

It’s a straight-forward issue.

1 - Don’t blitz a team/QB with better (considerably actually) EPA/Efficiency against the blitz than not.

2 - Don’t blitz off the Tight Slot (basically Wing) RIGHT_IN_QB_SIGHTLINE. It’s impossible not to see the blitz instantly in that occasion, so you’re just amplifying the effects of 1 above.

3 - The ball was out instantly. Instantly. It doesn’t matter whoever else you blitz. Suh won immediately (a non-blitzer) and couldn’t dream of getting home. Blitz read (see 2) and ball out immediately neutralizing any extra rushers.

4 - Now we have 1v1 with the most prolific WR in the league…mastery of the entire route tree…with a free release…with a 4 (6 really) way go and the entire route tree available to him…against a Safety who is in the impossible position of being 8 years off the ball and unable to reroute at all (or Illegal Contact or DPI).

No Safety ever in the history of the NFL covers this with any level of reliability. Hell, most CBs (great ones) have little to no chance here. This is the losingingest lose situation (truly a nightmare) for a DB to be put in.

With respect…anyone who thinks this is even in the same universe as a reasonable cover situation needs to either play some DB or learn more football. Winfield had no chance. Conversation over.

5 - And why was SMB on the field instead of Whitehead? This desperate attempt to pretend that SMB is a reliable coverage player needs to be put to bed. Give me Edwards or Winfield as NCB and Whitehead as Safety all day everyday. Or take an iDL or White off the field snd put Whitehead in there in this situation. Regardless, Whitehead should have been on the field.

None of this means Bowles deserves to be fired (he doesn’t)…but it should be recognized as a clear and present gaffe and course correction in similar situations in the future should be implemented.

[Doctor]

Rams hurried up after the first completion to prevent everything you just said.

And even if they did follow it all, the very high likelihood is the end result is exactly the same.
The entire point of taking a risk is to give yourself a shot to change the likely end result.

[Nobody]

Rams hurried up after the first completion to prevent everything you just said.

And even if they did follow it all, the very high likelihood is the end result is exactly the same.
The entire point of taking a risk is to give yourself a shot to change the likely end result.

What? What are you even saying?

What did I just say that the Rams hurry up prevented?

I don't even understand how what you're saying is even responsive to what I've written. I can't even connect the exchange its so zoomed out and disconnected.

[nybf]

That wasn't a 50/50 ball hfs. I don't know if you're an actual idiot or if you think the longer you drag this out the more details you can change because people will forget.

But it looks like I was right from the start. Given enough time, you'll have them starting first and goal from the 1.

Are you really so childish you are attacking me for words someone else said just so you can keep throwing your tantrum?

I'm not attacking you. I'm asking: are you stupid or do you think we are? Those are the only two explanations for your constantly changing game scenario.

[irishHITMAN4rent]

Rams hurried up after the first completion to prevent everything you just said.

And even if they did follow it all, the very high likelihood is the end result is exactly the same.
The entire point of taking a risk is to give yourself a shot to change the likely end result.

Give it a rest Bootz...........your getting more tedious than normal

[kaimaru]

Rams hurried up after the first completion to prevent everything you just said.

And even if they did follow it all, the very high likelihood is the end result is exactly the same.
The entire point of taking a risk is to give yourself a shot to change the likely end result.

Give it a rest Bootz...........your getting more tedious than normal

It's obvious now that Bootz made an account as Doctor.

[Phantom]

Apparently, David agreed Bowles is a fucking fraud

[Digital_Damage]

I see DR is not done tickling the balls...

[Monero]

Bowles ruined what would've been Brady's last comeback victory. I can't wait until he's gone.

[nybf]

Given the play we saw just before and the FGs we've seen Matt Gay make here (58 yards vs the Rams),

Did you see Matt Gay fuck that kick up?

[Doctor]

I knew you'd come here to flex that your bet on something that has happened 6% of the time was justified.

[13F11B]

I knew you'd come here to flex that your bet on something that has happened 6% of the time was justified.

You are the only dumbass that thinks a 57+ yard field goal is easier than a 30yd field goal. Stat that.

[Doctor]

Yeah, because that's totally what I was argueing. 100%

[Digital_Damage]

GJ Bowles, our window has now closed... you fucking moron.

[Phantom]

Yeah it’s too bad he didn’t ride off into sunset with 2nd Super Bowl victories as Bucs

Thank you fraud Bowles