- Mar 11, 2009
- 10,526
- 3,581
- 28,180
I don't quite get that either. If they get it, they are relying on their defense to hold the Chiefs to not score even a FG, not advance the ball some 40 yards, which had been very iffy in the second half. If they make the FG, they are in the same situation, really, only the game is tied, instead of them winning. Well, the defense held, but since they botched the 2-point conversion, they didn't even get a tie. What kind of coach takes this kind of risk? This tells me the Raiders coaching simply doesn't understand the strengths or weaknesses of their players.Edit: even worse they went for two instead of tying the game! Take the points against KC!!!
I know this is really Monday morning quarterbacking, but that last play was a disaster. Josh Jacobs had the game of his career, why didn't they either hand him the ball or design a play for him, even a quick out or screen, when faced with 4th and 1 late? All they needed was one yard to keep the drive going. Get another 20 yards, kick a FG and win. Instead, the Raiders went for a high-risk pass, that they bungled. What kind of play calling is that? It was also apparent that the Chiefs were going to blitz, or jam the line of scrimmage on the last play, at that point did Carr audible for that deep out pass? Why such a high risk throw? Why not look for a slant out, a quick toss over the blitzing linebackers, or as said an out or screen to Jacobs? I simply don't get it?
The Raiders also looked at times like they lacked cohesion, maybe even passion. Granted, Adams was really irked at the end, and they did start well. But they were also lucky to be in the game late. Compare this to the team that played with its heart for Rich Bisaccia last year. Am I wrong here?
