Paul Lapolice critics Marc Trestman`s play calling

While Coach explained to Herb that he went for it on thirde down at the five yard line with worse case regaining field position ( I agree). Paul Lapolice criticised for doing the opposite pointed to Trestman`s call not taking the 3 points early in the game and having to throw a touchdown at the end of the game when a field goal would have won him the game had he taken the points.

:)

I still think it was an idiotic move. Why gamble that early in the game? You take the points that are there. Those three points wound up being the difference at the end, when we had to score a TD and couldn't just settle for a field goal.

Despite my usual belief of taking the easy points, I remember thinking that the way the game was going, that the Als really needed to score a major in that situation. I supported the decision and still do despite the result...it was the players that failed to execute. And BTW, I think LaPolice should be more concerned about himself!

:thup:

Absolutely re LaPolice!

The reason I posted. I found it interesting how two coach could have a complete opposite position and it is extremely rare you see a football coach critic another.

I feel that even after almost four years, Trestman hasn't gotten the hang of when and how to gamble and when and how to play it safe. Most of the time, it feels like he's just randomly making decisions instead of doing what's right for the team, in the moment. Why the frack do you gamble on third and 2 when it's the first half of the game and you are not trailing by a giant deficit? And even if that decision is warranted, why the frack do you call a pass play? Why not line up McPherson in the backfield and make the defense have to defend the QB draw AND the running back?

It was absolutely moronic, and you could argue quite credibly that it cost us the game against Calgary, because we could have won the game with a field goal instead of being forced to score a major.

Well it looks like Burke was watching and laughing his head off…

I was totally in agreement with this move/gamble from the opponent 3 yard line. How can a play in the second quarter change the outcome of a game? Not long after, we recovered their fumble, we returned it to their second yard line and scored. Had we gone for a field goal,Calgary would have had the ball on their own 35 or elsewhere had they requested a kickoff. The game would have been different. Yes,had it been the last play of the first half it would have had an impact on the game but not then. There is no way that we can say we would have scored 3 and been only 2 behind with 16 seconds left. The drop by Jamel,with 16 seconds remaining in the game did change the results; not the gamble.

Richard

I was totally in agreement with this move/gamble from the opponent 3 yard line. How can a play in the second quarter change the outcome of a game? Not long after, we recovered their fumble, we returned it to their second yard line and scored. Had we gone for a field goal,Calgary would have had the ball on their own 35 or elsewhere had they requested a kickoff. The game would have been different. Yes,had it been the last play of the first half it would have had an impact on the game but not then. There is no way that we can say we would have scored 3 and been only 2 behind with 16 seconds left. The drop by Jamel,with 16 seconds remaining in the game did change the results; not the gamble.

Richard

:thup:

Every play at every time affects the game. There was no reason to gamble, none at all. We were only trailing by 7 points in the second quarter of a 60-minute game. It was a bad decision and a bad playcall.

And Lapo lost by 5 by taking field goals instead of gambling in his game, very strange comment, looks like all the questioning from fans here about his play calling has him on the defensive.

Lapolice just crossed a line. A HC usually never questions "publically" another HCs decisions. I don't think even Don Mathews ever did something arrogant like that. Is Lapolice suddenly "channeling" Mike Kelly?

Lapolice must be perfect at calling plays... A simple look at the standings shows the Als have scored 106 more points than Winnipeg in 17 games. Maybe Lapolice should concentrate on his next game, and get his 2nd string QB ready, instead of making dumb arse remarks :thdn:

What irritated me more is when he said his coordinators were in the next room watching the game and he could hear them laugh. Doesn't take a psychology degree to know Burke had a good time...

He seemed really annoyed at the questions regarding his play calling judgement. I think 3 callers harped on it.

Agree with D.P., take the 3 points. Whyte (or any FG kicker) should be able to hit from 10 yards. Game would have been 14-10 at that point as oppose to 14-7.

Als failed twice to come away with points during the game both times in the red zone.

One thing with 3rd down gambles. Not too long ago, the Als were able to convert those into scores or 1st downs. However, an old nemesis has come back to haunt them - the inability to convert. How many 2-and-outs have we been seeing lately? The Als are not playing with the confidence of a championship team. I would dearly love to have the Als prove me wrong in BC this weekend and in the playoffs. Hopefully, they will be able to reach down deep and pull a few rabbits out of their hat! if they are to advance beyond the semi-final and/or final, they will have to sustain drives and come up with new wrinkles.

I will go on record as saying I agree with the decision, not necessarily the play that was called.

We`ve criticized Trestman for being passive, here he was allowing his offense to make a statement. Kick the field goal, Calgary would have taken the kickoff and with the way Whyte was kicking off they would have started on the 45. Well on the way to at least a field goal of their own.

What really bothered me was the 3rd down gamble in the 4th quarter that McPherson was stuffed on. The Als ran this crazy fire drill play with Whyte lining up to punt and then running to the line of scrimmage. The timing seemed way off. Just run the darn ball.

Kick the field goal, Calgary would have taken the kickoff and with the way Whyte was kicking off they would have started on the 45. Well on the way to at least a field goal of their own.
Maybe, maybe not. I for one who would have liked the chances of the Als getting a FG from around 15 yards than the the Stamps returning a kick and having to get to at least the 50 yard line to try for a FG.