McVay Regrets Mistakes In Championship Game Loss

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
I just remember this

View attachment 75283

Unless the driver in the limousine was listening to the Laker game.
When this character and the character that looks like Huey Lewis first enter the building, this character is describing a very elaborate Laker fast break that even involves Kareem while the white guy looks bored as shit.
Perfect for making the security desk think nothing untoward is about to occur.
 
Last edited:
  • Cheers
Reactions: Tano
I thought it was Huey Lewis when I watched it
1776271380742.webp
 
  • Like
Reactions: David Ray
No, you're completely missing the point. Regardless of whether we kicked the FG or failed on fourth down, we needed to get a stop and get the ball back. We failed to do that. Seattle's game plan would have been the same. Convert first downs and run clock. By the time we got the ball back, we were stuck on our 7 yard line with no timeouts and only 25 seconds left. We had only moved the ball to the Seattle 49 yard line by the time the clock expired. If McVay kicks the FG, that's still a loss. Your alternate scenario relies on the fantasy of our defense getting a stop it failed to get in real life.

Oh, and by the way, if we had kicked the FG, Seattle almost certainly gets the ball somewhere between the 20 and the 35 yard line, instead of at their own 6 yard line. Given the fact that Seattle punted from our 45 yard line, that means the extra field position would have enabled them to kick a FG, extending their lead to 4. I'm glad McVay had the balls to go for the lead with how poorly our defense was playing. The defense vindicated that decision when they shat the bed.

You're mistakenly trying to justify a poor coaching decision based upon the flawed approach of - after the fact - looking at the specifics of how our defence actually played after McVay's decision. All of which - including Seattle's playcalling - was clearly influenced by the fact that they were up by more than a field goal.

What the Seahawks were able to do if we had kicked the field goal is entirely irrelevant. A coach's job is to maximize their team's chances to win, and putting your team in a position where only a field goal is needed to win was the call to make there.

The fact is that there is a world of difference between how both teams call plays in late game situations when they are separated by less than a field goal.

By itelf, gambling on 4th and 4 in such a crucial situation was a very poor decision. It actually made the Seahawks' playcalling easier and our play options quite predictable by removing the running option.

Based on the down and distance alone of the 4th and 4 play, we had no real option to run the ball there.

So, the Seahawks were able to stuff us by selling out for the pass and double covering our attacking players.
Whatever play we called there was dead on arrival.

It was a dumb decision by McVay, a Dan Campbell-style, ill advised 4th down decision, actually.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: David Ray
You're mistakenly trying to justify a poor coaching decision based upon the flawed approach of - after the fact - looking at the specifics of how our defence actually played after McVay's decision. All of which - including Seattle's playcalling - was clearly influenced by the fact that they were up by more than a field goal.

What the Seahawks were able to do if we had kicked the field goal is entirely irrelevant. A coach's job is to maximize their team's chances to win, and putting your team in a position where only a field goal is needed to win was the call to make there.

The fact is that there is a world of difference between how both teams call plays in late game situations when they are separated by less than a field goal.

By itelf, gambling on 4th and 4 in such a crucial situation was a very poor decision. It actually made the Seahawks' playcalling easier and our play options quite predictable by removing the running option.

Based on the down and distance alone of the 4th and 4 play, we had no real option to run the ball there.

So, the Seahawks were able to stuff us by selling out for the pass and double covering our attacking players.
Whatever play we called there was dead on arrival.

It was a dumb decision by McVay, a Dan Campbell-style, ill advised 4th down decision, actually.
No, I'm applauding McVay for being aggressive and making the right coaching decision. You're embracing the world of fantasy to justify your conservative approach that would have also left us with a loss. Your scenario hinges on the defense getting a stop it could not get in real life. And your only way around that is to try and claim that Seattle would make mistakes they didn't in real life because there was more pressure on them. No sale.

Seattle would have had the same game plan to run clock and could have done so just as effectively in your scenario. McVay made the right call on that 4th down play. I'm glad he didn't coach scared.
 
No, I'm applauding McVay for being aggressive and making the right coaching decision. You're embracing the world of fantasy to justify your conservative approach that would have also left us with a loss. Your scenario hinges on the defense getting a stop it could not get in real life. And your only way around that is to try and claim that Seattle would make mistakes they didn't in real life because there was more pressure on them. No sale.

Seattle would have had the same game plan to run clock and could have done so just as effectively in your scenario. McVay made the right call on that 4th down play. I'm glad he didn't coach scared.

I have WAY WAY less of a problem with McVays 4th down call than his before the half FUBAR.
 
  • Like
  • HaHa
Reactions: David Ray and Tano
I have WAY WAY less of a problem with McVays 4th down call than his before the half FUBAR.
That's a complete contradiction because it's virtually the same thing. He was aggressive on offense, didnt make 1st down and the defense couldnt make a stop
 
That's a complete contradiction because it's virtually the same thing. He was aggressive on offense, didnt make 1st down and the defense couldnt make a stop

Two different things entirely. False equivalency
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tano