Just wondering, why the hell did we try the onside kick after we scored down by 5 with 2:15 left on the clock with one timeout. As we know the kick failed, which led them to punt inside our own 10. If we had kicked it off, the same scenario could of happened but we could of gotten great field position with an easier chance to score.
Quote:Just wondering, why the hell did we try the onside kick after we scored down by 5 with 2:15 left on the clock with one timeout. As we know the kick failed, which led them to punt inside our own 10. If we had kicked it off, the same scenario could of happened but we could of gotten great field position with an easier chance to score.
#becausegusbadley
Random question about onside kicks. Why don't they ever try to kick it over the heads (like 15-20 yards) of the opposing ST between them and the returner and put all of your speed guys on the field to chase it? Seems like the probability of a recovery would be better in my opinion.
Quote: #becausegusbadley
Yea, i figured this.
Because the Jets couldn't run the ball whatsoever if I recall correctly. I had no problem with the decision.
The same scenario could have happened, but you don't know that. The onside gives you the ball back with time score if you get it. If you kickoff there, the Jets only need one or two first downs to seal the deal. Now if the Jaguars had an extremely doubt defense that you know will stand up and keep the Jets from getting a first down, then maybe you kickoff. But with our defense you can't take that gamble. Ultimately they did show up and stop the Jets, but again you don't know that's going to happen there.
I like the onside kick strategy especially with the score.
#1 If it works, you get control of the ball rightaway
#2 if it does not work, you have stop them in three downs which is the case as well if we don't do onside kick
#3 The Jets are without kicker, so field goal option might fail if we stop them and still get good field position
The key for the jags to come back is to stop the jets. With onside kick you have an option of not even attempting to stop the jets and if it fails you can still attempt and win and get the ball back. Thats the right call in my view (situational football, Jets without kicker, point diff 23-28 one possession game with Jets successful field goal).
If the Jets had converted a first down and the Jaguars never got the ball back everybody would be asking why we didn't onside kick.
Quote:If the Jets had converted a first down and the Jaguars never got the ball back everybody would be asking why we didn't onside kick.
But if the Jags had won nobody would have been asking either question.
Quote:If the Jets had converted a first down and the Jaguars never got the ball back everybody would be asking why we didn't onside kick.
They couldn't run the ball all day. Assuming we got a touchback, they would of went 3 and out at least between the 20-30 yard line. They wouldnt risk passing it and we would of had the same amount of time left at maybe the 30 or more yard line.
The Gus Bradley criticism is warranted a lot of times, but not here. I thought it was the right call. Or at least not a bad decision. Understood it. Jets were without a kicker and couldn't run the ball on top of Nick Marshall just muffing a punt.
I had no problem it's the challenge of the Walters catch as well.
I guess when we hate a guy, we really hate a guy.
Quote:I like the onside kick strategy especially with the score.
#1 If it works, you get control of the ball rightaway
#2 if it does not work, you have stop them in three downs which is the case as well if we don't do onside kick
#3 The Jets are without kicker, so field goal option might fail if we stop them and still get good field position
The key for the jags to come back is to stop the jets. With onside kick you have an option of not even attempting to stop the jets and if it fails you can still attempt and win and get the ball back. Thats the right call in my view (situational football, Jets without kicker, point diff 23-28 one possession game with Jets successful field goal).
#3 was key to the decision giving the Jaguars even more reason to make the onside call.
Quote:Random question about onside kicks. Why don't they ever try to kick it over the heads (like 15-20 yards) of the opposing ST between them and the returner and put all of your speed guys on the field to chase it? Seems like the probability of a recovery would be better in my opinion.
because the return team can just call fair catch if you kick it in the air
Quote:The Gus Bradley criticism is warranted a lot of times, but not here. I thought it was the right call. Or at least not a bad decision. Understood it. Jets were without a kicker and couldn't run the ball on top of Nick Marshall just muffing a punt.
I had no problem it's the challenge of the Walters catch as well.
I guess when we hate a guy, we really hate a guy.
The Walters challenge was a good challenge for once. Every week it seems Gus throws the red flag to challenge a call you know full well is not going to get reversed thereby wasting a time out. In this game he again threw the red flat and the no reversal cost the team the time out, but in this case it actually should have been overturned. I guess the ref felt there wasn't enough evidence, but it looked rather clear cut to me.
Quote:But if the Jags had won nobody would have been asking either question.
If Poz falls on that fumble, nobody is asking this question
Quote:I like the onside kick strategy especially with the score.
#1 If it works, you get control of the ball rightaway
#2 if it does not work, you have stop them in three downs which is the case as well if we don't do onside kick
#3 The Jets are without kicker, so field goal option might fail if we stop them and still get good field position
The key for the jags to come back is to stop the jets. With onside kick you have an option of not even attempting to stop the jets and if it fails you can still attempt and win and get the ball back. Thats the right call in my view (situational football, Jets without kicker, point diff 23-28 one possession game with Jets successful field goal).
Yea, I think you explained it the best. Because of how ineffective the Jets offense was and the fact that they were using a punter to field kicks, the onside kick was worth the risk. It was very unlikely the Jets would score even at midfield. The fact that they got the ball back pretty easily shows it wasn't a bad decision.
Quote:Yea, I think you explained it the best. Because of how ineffective the Jets offense was and the fact that they were using a punter to field kicks, the onside kick was worth the risk. It was very unlikely the Jets would score even at midfield. The fact that they got the ball back pretty easily shows it wasn't a bad decision.
But it gave us bad field position inside the 10. My scenario would of given us the ball maybe at the 30 or better with about the same amount of time.
Quote:But it gave us bad field position inside the 10. My scenario would of given us the ball maybe at the 30 or better with about the same amount of time.
There are plenty of things we can say were issues in the Jets. I don't see the decision to onside kick as one of them.
Quote:The Walters challenge was a good challenge for once. Every week it seems Gus throws the red flag to challenge a call you know full well is not going to get reversed thereby wasting a time out. In this game he again threw the red flat and the no reversal cost the team the time out, but in this case it actually should have been overturned. I guess the ref felt there wasn't enough evidence, but it looked rather clear cut to me.
I agree. I thought that was an obvious catch with two toes in, but at least Myers made the FG.
Quote:But it gave us bad field position inside the 10. My scenario would of given us the ball maybe at the 30 or better with about the same amount of time.
But you would not have had the chance for immediate recovery and possession.