Skinsfan1311 Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 ..half ended? It seemed like a bush-league move to me. I didn't understand the logic of it. IMHO, it only exposed players to injury. Am I wrong here, or was there a good reason for calling those time-outs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 he's a prenning smoe' simulating real game conditions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickfox45 Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 yea that pissed me off as well as the announcers, they were confused too. the only thing i can think of is that billick wanted to see his punt returner get a chance at it since he hadnt seen him much. too bad he had a 2 yard return! :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Money Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 He seemed to be agonizing over the fact that we tied it the game at the end of the fourth and I was screaming 'cause he tried to do the same thing at the end of the half... Hypocrite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSF Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 He seemed to be agonizing over the fact that we tied it the game at the end of the fourth and I was screaming 'cause he tried to do the same thing at the end of the half... Hypocrite. My thoughts exactly! Its ok that he wanted to extend the game, but god forbid we do the exact same thing. Felt like slapping the tv at that point. Heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Potato Sack Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 And at the end of the game, he looked pissed that we moved the ball to take it into overtime. He is such an @sshole. He ranks up there with Mike Martz in my opinion as the most arrogant, dickhead coaches in the league. The only reason they won is because they had veterans going up against our fourth stringers. What's sad is our 4th stringers took it into overtime. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark327 Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 Billick wanted nothing less then what he ended up getting a ravens win over the redskins . he's wants this to be a rivialry , battle of the beltways :doh: . a meaningless game to everyone except the ravens and their fans , if it sounds like i ranting some , it's because i am , be where i'm at this morning and you'd know what i mean you'd think they won the fricken superbowl again :doh: if i could move out of this area i surely would . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie5 Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 He wanted to try a Hail Mary b/c they hadn't had the chance to try it yet. I hate the Ravens, but there was some legitimacy in that move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsfan1311 Posted September 2, 2005 Author Share Posted September 2, 2005 Good point Ernie5..I hadn't thought of that. It wasn't so much them working another offensive series, it's the fact that they were trying to force the Skins to punt, thus putting both teams players at risk. (It's special-teams where the players seem more likely to get hurt.) I'm still of the opinion that it was senseless, and disrespectful. It seemed more like a ploy for some more "face" time for the cameras..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 Kevin is exactly right. All of Billick's sour faces when the game went into OT didn't square with his desparatly calling three time outs to try to get the ball back with what would have been 15 seconds in the first half. The Redskins seemed shocked that he was trying to stretch out the half. Billick was so stupid you would think that he was auditioning for a job as a sportswriter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 He seemed to be agonizing over the fact that we tied it the game at the end of the fourth and I was screaming 'cause he tried to do the same thing at the end of the half... Hypocrite. No kidding. The ego on that donkey. He has his offense intentionally go for a 2pt conversion so that a field goal can only tie, then we kick a field goal and tie it to send the game into OT. The hypocrisy and ego here are just amazing. Even if Coach Gibbs ultimately didn't care about winning the game, it was a shot across Billick's bow. It let him know we were going to at least not back down to his hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 My thoughts exactly! Its ok that he wanted to extend the game, but god forbid we do the exact same thing. Felt like slapping the tv at that point. Heh. Billick was responsible for extending the game at the end of the half and at the end of regulation. When the Ravens took the lead with just under 2 minutes to play in the last preseason game, there was absolutely no reason to go for two. You're inviting overtime. If that's what you want, then fine...but don't look all annoyed when the Skins take the opportunity to work on the 2 minute drill with their first-round QB and get down in position to tie the game with a FG. What would it have mattered if the Skins won that game 20-19 or lost it 19-17 (if Hall misses)? I guess Billick wouldn't have had OT to pump up the confidence of his WRs. Just another thing to add to the list of things that irritate me about BB. :ravensuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Prime Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 Yeah he was just being a pr!ck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H@iL2Gibb$ Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 there was absolutely no reason to go for two. You're inviting overtime I agree. It's preseason Billick...wins don't count. Kick the extra point and go for the onside kick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie5 Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 I actually think it was more sensible to call the time-outs at the end of the 1st half [when the game arguably means something] then going for two to extend the game. On the other hand, Billick might have been taking it as an opportunity to put in his two-point offense one last time before it counted. I don't like Billick at all, but I don't see it as a completely ridiculous move. I sorta think playing a 1st string WR against our 3rds was a little odd -- especially b/c Hymes seemed somewhat hobbled at one point in OT. Wouldn't that have been funny? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funkyalligator Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 um...actually I think going for the onside kick would have been even worse.....because people tend to get injured on those....remember winslow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAVENS_SUCK_HUN Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 Billick wanted nothing less then what he ended up getting a ravens win over the redskins . he's wants this to be a rivialry , battle of the beltways :doh: . a meaningless game to everyone except the ravens and their fans , if it sounds like i ranting some , it's because i am , be where i'm at this morning and you'd know what i mean you'd think they won the fricken superbowl again :doh: if i could move out of this area i surely would . I hear you.....I was born and raised in the DC area and these people think there is a major rivalry against these two teams. They are all haters and we could care less about them. It funny......but not if you live here. That's why I hate the Ravens. Oh and Brian But-Lick is the most arrogant a-hole in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 Just Billick being Billick................. ANAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 I'm going to have to go with Because He's a Dumbass for 100, Alex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsfan1311 Posted September 2, 2005 Author Share Posted September 2, 2005 I'm going to have to go with Because He's a Dumbass for 100, Alex. That's Correct ! Mr. Rocky...but please form your responses in question form, i.e. (Why is He a Dumbass, for 100, Alex?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 That's Correct ! Mr. Rocky...but please form your responses in question form, i.e. (Why is He a Dumbass, for 100, Alex?) Once again, you're right. Answer: Because he called three frickin' time outs with less than a minute on the clock in the first half of a meaningless pre-season game so we could watch a career backup quarterback throw an incompletion. Response: Why is Brian Billick is a Dumbass? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.