San Diego's dumbest decision of the game

I know there are other post game threads but I feel as though this deserves its own. If the mods disagree they can merge. I'm going off memory here, but there was 630 to go left it the game, rivers just had a 7 yard scramble to make it fourth and 4 and San Diego is down 9 points. What do they decide to do? Punt the ball and play for field position. I understand their offense wasn't exactly on fire and might not have picked it up, but they are essentially giving up by punting the ball back there. How can any NFL coach play for field position in that situation?

McCoy coached under John Fox. The apple doesn't fall too far from the tree.

I remember when he did that, too. I was like "Gee, thanks! What a nice gift!"

BB obviously would have gone for it in that situation. I guess I'm so used to that mentality.

New England Pride said:

I know there are other post game threads but I feel as though this deserves its own. If the mods disagree they can merge. I'm going off memory here, but there was 630 to go left it the game, rivers just had a 7 yard scramble to make it fourth and 4 and San Diego is down 9 points. What do they decide to do? Punt the ball and play for field position. I understand their offense wasn't exactly on fire and might not have picked it up, but they are essentially giving up by punting the ball back there. How can any NFL coach play for field position in that situation?

Click to expand...

I agree, i was suprised they didn't go for it. I guess the logic was that they forced us to a couple of 3 and outs, but down 9 you have to go for it.

And on top of everything the OP said, they didn't even have their punter!!

When 4th down came up I turned to my wife and said "SD's got to go for it here" and then they trot out the punt team. So I'm yelling "Watch for the fake!" and they actually punted.

I was flabbergasted. And grateful!

Not all coaches prepare for every situation like BB. That's why BB dominates the AFC

rlcarr said:

And on top of everything the OP said, they didn't even have their punter!!

When 4th down came up I turned to my wife and said "SD's got to go for it here" and then they trot out the punt team. So I'm yelling "Watch for the fake!" and they actually punted.

I was flabbergasted. And grateful!

Click to expand...

Same here. Told everyone in the room, no way this isn't a fake.

I think they were confident they could get a stop, since they held us to four 3 & outs in the 2nd half.

After all, our TD "drive" was just 1 play.

It just seems like common sense down 2 scores to go for it.

TBR said:

I think they were confident they could get a stop, since they held us to four 3 & outs in the 2nd half.

After all, our TD "drive" was just 1 play.

Click to expand...

Problem is, down 9 you need 2 stops or an onside mick. Chances of winning go way down.

TBR said:

I think they were confident they could get a stop, since they held us to four 3 & outs in the 2nd half.

After all, our TD "drive" was just 1 play.

Click to expand...

But even a 3 and out, if the three are runs or completions, means they're getting the ball back with about 4 minutes to go down two scores. If you're that confident you can stop the Pats 3 and out, you should be equally confident to do so at midfield if you don't convert. Field position meant little at that point, as a Pats first down essentially ends the game, whether that grants them an additional field goal or not.

I see this with a lot of teams going against the better teams/QBs. Opponents do it against Peyton Manning all the time and drives me nuts. They give the upper echelon TOO much respect. If you're going to beat a Manning, or a Brady, or a Rodgers, you can't play conservative and scared. SD punting there was more interested in avoiding the big loss than they were having a chance to win the game.

Chargers fans agree
http://forums.chargers.com/showthread.php?t=102429

Yea good points ^^^

Trust me. I was absolutely BAFFLED by this decision and was still expecting to see a fake until the ball actually connected with the punter's foot. At that point I turned to my brother and said "This is just another reason why I'm glad Belichick is our coach."

The crazy part is that going for it wouldn't even be considered a 'gutsy' call. It would just be the expected call when down by two scores with such little time left.

Thanks goodness we have Bill.

I mentioned this in the game thread. Seriously couldn't believe they were not going for it, it kinda reminded me of SB39 when there were like 3 minutes left, we're up 10 and the Eagles are just kind of strolling to the LOS instead of actually trying to hurry. It's just like "Uhhhh thank you I guess "

As I said in the thread makes you appreciate BB even more when aside from very rare instances seems to have these common sense in game decisions down more than any other coach.

It sort of reminds me of Super Bowl 39 when the Eagles dinked and dunked without any 'hurry' during one of their final drives of the game (despite time running out and down by two scores). I've since seen taped interviews in which Pats offensive members on the sideline were wondering amongst themselves "we are up by two scores right?"

Patsylicious, as soon as I hit 'submit' on my response I saw yours posted within the same minute and essentially saying the same thing. I guess great minds think alike.

I think punting was the right move. They were having a lot of trouble moving the ball and their defense was holding the Patriots to 3 and out consistently. Turning the ball over at the 40 would have been a death blow.

As Madden would say, "they didn't make it on 3rd down, why do they think they would make it on 4th"

Let me talk about one other situation that i simply can't agree

The game was 14-6 and we had just scored a touchdown. The score said 14-12. Why don't you go for 2??? Why do coaches go for 1 in that situation?

If we convert it, we are tied already, so the desperation from being behind doesn't exist. If we fail, we are still 2 points away from them. A field goal would put us ahead, just like being 1 point behind. Basically, being 1 or 2 points behind is the same damn thing (Let's be real, Safety are very rare), but being tied is completely different than being behind 1.

The biggest argument over going for the kick is that is less likely for someone to get injured in contrast to another offense play. Well, I say that you can't really know that for sure. Gronk is an example of someone who got injured being on the Extra Point kick unit.

That's just something that's on my mind for quiite some time, i'd like to know what people here think about it

From footballoutsiders' audibles article:

By win probability, punting gives them about a 5 percent chance of winning, going for it about 9 percent. That 4 percent doesn't sound like much, but they would have almost doubled their chances by going for it. One day this will seem ridiculous.