"V" wrote:
????? People arguing it was a good playcall?? Bullshit!

Marching straight down the field to take a 2-score lead in the first quarter, and you run a reverse on first down in the red zone?? TERRIBLE playcall!

Maybe if it was second and short, maybe. Maybe if we already had a healthy lead, maybe. Maybe if we weren't playing DET, who we shouldn't need trick plays to beat. Maybe if we weren't in the red zone. Maybe if we weren't moving that ball effectively through traditional offense. Maybe then it would have been a good playcall.

It wasn't. This play was bad playcalling AND bad execution. Too often people here try to blame it on one or the other. Truth is you can judge the two separately, and both sucked on that play.
I don't think a reverse is a terrible call there.
You look at how the play was setting up, the misdirection looked to be working and could have been a big play.
I tend to like those plays.
I do concede that the strength of the opponent should come into play in determining the calls, but I'm not sure that early in a game it is as big a factor as after you have seen a bit of how both teams are playing on that particular day.

However, the execution speaks to the fact that in this case, it was a bad call.
When the running back tries to pitch the ball across his body and does so to where the WR is rather than where he is going to be, the assumption has to be that those problems were there in practice.
The coaches should know that the players aren't prepared to execute that type of exchange and avoid using the call.

I guess I would compare it to putting a mediocre offensive tackle up against a great DE, and the coach decides that he's going to ask him to block the defender one-on-one.
It's no surprise when the tackle gets beat.
It's true that the tackle might not execute his block, but the coach should have predicted that the player was not going to be able to execute to the necessary level and schemed to help him.