Rouge attempt was right

[url=] ... story.html[/url]

Here is an article written by a former lineman, Mike Abou-Mechreck, explaining why the rouge attempt was correct. Everybody needs to stop thinking they're the coach of this team and just chill out. Otherwise we'll run all the good players right outta' this province.

Just let the pros do what they do without criticism. Have faith.

True enough; Some coaches would have gone with their punter and other coaches who would have sent out the fieldgoal kicker. I enjoyed the drama outcome of the game none the less.

The problem that I have with the whole situation is the mass confusion of the coaches in the last 20 seconds. They take a 3 yard loss to get to the middle of the field, call a time out, send out Congi, Calgary calls a time out, then put Johnson in to punt. Miller needed to stick to his guns and kick the FG.

I really hope the riders are put into the exact situation again, then we'll see for sure if Miller made the right call. With that said, I think there was about an equal chance of making either a field goal or rouge. So I think all this fuss is not necessary.

Yeah, another way to put the thread title might have been "rouge attempt wasn't wrong" - both have their merits, even though I personally would have gone the FG route with a can't-miss-inside-the-40 kicker.

And welcome to the board badattitude and ice pik. As I say with every new member, "post early and post often". We like the traffic, better yet with insight :slight_smile:

Was that you on TV tonight Thryllin?

I think one of the reasons his argument isn't valid is because he wasn't at the game. One of his points is that the wind was at the Riders back, although anyone sitting in the stands knew full well the wind wasn't making any difference in the kicks all night.

The second reason it was a poor decision was the fact that they lost 3 yards moving it between the hash mark to set up for the field goal, which made the punt longer and with a more difficult angle to punt out of bounds.

There are arguments that a punt is the safer play, there are less elements involved in it like a holder who might bobble the snap, or less chances of it getting blocked. All that said I still think the field goal was the better option, and that's despite us giving up 2 missed returns for touchdowns on the year.

I'm going to start by saying I am in favour of the Field Goal option.

That being said, I'm going to play Devil's Advocate for just a second.
Has anybody thought that maybe Miller preferred to have the punt-cover team on the field instead of the field-goal team? In case of a miss, it's easier to duck and dive around O-Linemen for a TD return than it is to beat a punt-cover team.

Just a thought.

Well it is a bit of a catch 22, if it would have worked Miller would have been called a ballsy genius. If it didn't you would have what we have now. If a fg attempt did ring off the post or get returned then people would be saying that he should have gone for the punt. I just take it as face value, a play that could have worked but didn't.

I do agree that the punt cover team is going to be better than the field goal cover team. That being said usually it's the long field goals that are returned for touchdowns when they are missed, a 35 yard attempt shouldn't be that big of a risk.

Good field goals are never returned.

I was shocked when the punt team came out on the field, and was mad after it didn't work. But I understand the coach's rationale, and support them on it. Btw, Calgary's coaching was probably more suspect than our's since they only had one man back. Field goal or punt, they should have had 3 men back there in that situation.

All that aside, I hate the rule! The whole idea of winning a game on a punt single (IMO) sucks! Same goes for a missed field goal. If you want to keep the rouge, fine. But there should be something tweeked in the rule stating that you cannot win the game on a rouge. You should have to earn your win - make a filed goal or a touchdown.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but wasn't Congi close enough that if he missed it'd have a good chance to go through the endzone anyways?And since when does Congi miss critical field goals?

It would have been about a 35 yard attempt, so as long as he kicked it with enough leg to make a 55 yarder, it would have gone through the end zone. Congi has been very good making clutch field goals.

Yeah that's what the whole articleI posted at the top of this thread was about. It was written by a linemen.

When and what?