San Diego's dumbest decision of the game

Oswlek · Dec 8, 2014

JayNM said:
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

Had it been the 4th quarter, I'd agree with you. But with 40 minutes remaining, there are far too many permutations to begin chasing points like that. For instance, had SD scored a TD early in the second half after a failed 2pt conversion, they would have had a two possession lead. Or another is that a failed 2pter + subsequent TD would still allow SD to win with just two FG drives.

There is an argument to be made for going for two all the time, if your offense is good enough in short yardage, but I think NE was right on this one.

TinhWoodhead · Dec 8, 2014

Maybe McCoy couldn't see the scoreboard because the pregame smokes hasn't cleared yet.

Shed83 · Dec 8, 2014

JayNM said:
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

Your outlook makes sense later in the game but at that point it was just as likely that they score 2 field goals and we score a TD. I think taking the (almost) guaranteed point was the correct call.

JayNM · Dec 8, 2014

Oswlek said:
Had it been the 4th quarter, I'd agree with you. But with 40 minutes remaining, there are far too many permutations to begin chasing points like that. For instance, had SD scored a TD early in the second half after a failed 2pt conversion, they would have had a two possession lead. Or another is that a failed 2pter + subsequent TD would still allow SD to win with just two FG drives.

There is an argument to be made for going for two all the time, if your offense is good enough in short yardage, but I think NE was right on this one.

Good point. I still believe the risk of going for two is worth it, since i'd rather be tied for the whole time we couldn't score than being a mesly point behind and thinking "so that's how you lose HFA". but it's a good point nevertheless. Of course, as the times ticks by, there's more incentive to go for it

New England Pride · Dec 8, 2014

Nunchucks said:
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"

I normally don't hit the disagree button, but you gave me one so eff you. And your point is garbage and you quoted John Madden. Punting the ball was a death blow. New England did nothing special on that possession and essentially ended it.

Oswlek · Dec 8, 2014

JayNM said:
Good point. I still believe the risk of going for two is worth it, since i'd rather be tied for the whole time we couldn't score than being a mesly point behind and thinking "so that's how you lose HFA". but it's a good point nevertheless. Of course, as the times ticks by, there's more incentive to go for it

Absolutely. The less time remaining, the fewer the possible outcomes.

It should also be pointed out that, other than by fumble, SD hadn't stopped NE on a single drive at that point, so they probably felt confident that they'd score a few more times.

Nunchucks · Dec 8, 2014

New England Pride said:
I normally don't hit the disagree button, but you gave me one so eff you. And your point is garbage and you quoted John Madden. Punting the ball was a death blow. New England did nothing special on that possession and essentially ended it.

LOL, touchy. I didn't say dislike, I just diagree..meh, I completely understand why they punted and I agree with that decision.

Posters generally, want the coach to act like they are playing Madden. The reality of the situation is that they had 3 time outs and about 3 minutes on the clock. Going for it on your own end on 4th and 4 when your offense was having problems moving the ball all game and your defense is playing great is dumb.

If you think Belichick would have gone for it under those exact circumstances....I am not sure what you are smoking, but I would like some.

Belichick would go for it only in the situation where he does not trust the defense to make a stop. The chargers defense was destroying the Patriots.

So, stop making opinions like you are playing a video game and I will stop quoting the game to slap you around.

Nunchucks · Dec 8, 2014

JayNM said:
Good point. I still believe the risk of going for two is worth it, since i'd rather be tied for the whole time we couldn't score than being a mesly point behind and thinking "so that's how you lose HFA". but it's a good point nevertheless. Of course, as the times ticks by, there's more incentive to go for it

Never chase points. You go for 2 when you must go for two. Until then, take the extra point.

New England Pride · Dec 8, 2014

Nunchucks said:
LOL, touchy. I didn't say dislike, I just diagree..meh, I completely understand why they punted and I agree with that decision.

Posters generally, want the coach to act like they are playing Madden. The reality of the situation is that they had 3 time outs and about 3 minutes on the clock. Going for it on your own end on 4th and 4 when your offense was having problems moving the ball all game and your defense is playing great is dumb.

If you think Belichick would have gone for it under those exact circumstances....I am not sure what you are smoking, but I would like some.

Belichick would go for it only in the situation where he does not trust the defense to make a stop. The chargers defense was destroying the Patriots.

So, stop making opinions like you are playing a video game and I will stop quoting the game to slap you around.

So Bill would have punted down 2 posessions with 6 mins to go instead of fourth and 4? Maybe you've been playing video games instead of watching BB coach over the last 15 years. You'd have a point if it was 4th and 12.

Nunchucks · Dec 8, 2014

New England Pride said:
So Bill would have punted down 2 posessions with 6 mins to go instead of fourth and 4? Maybe you've been playing video games instead of watching BB coach over the last 15 years. You'd have a point if it was 4th and 12.

I haven't played Madden in years. And yes, Bill would punt. I have been watching Belichick coach for his entire tenure, as a coach for the Browns, as a DC here in NE, as a DC for the Jets and of course here as a head coach. Not as familiar with his work at the Giants, but I did know about him then.

Good sound football is to punt the ball. I know he would punt because his offense was atrocious on 3rd down and his defense was suffocating the Chargers.

Oswlek · Dec 8, 2014

New England Pride said:
So Bill would have punted down 2 posessions with 6 mins to go instead of fourth and 4? Maybe you've been playing video games instead of watching BB coach over the last 15 years. You'd have a point if it was 4th and 12.

Bill went for it on 4th and 3 at midfield with 6 minutes to go just last week.

Granted, SD's D was performing better than NE's was against the Packers, but that is offset by the fact that the Patriots weren't trailing by two scores.

I think he goes for it.

Nunchucks · Dec 8, 2014

Oswlek said:
Bill went for it on 4th and 3 at midfield with 6 minutes to go just last week.

Granted, NE's D wasn't doing quite as well against the Packers as SD's, but that is offset by the fact that the Patriots weren't trailing by two scores.

I think he goes for it.

Patriots offense was moving the ball much better and the Patriots defense was not getting stops. Much different situation.

letekro · Dec 8, 2014

JayNM said:
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.

You're ignoring the possibility that SD scores more in the game. What if we go for 2 in that situation, miss it, and then SD scores a TD. Now you're down 2 scores. That is a result you want to avoid at all costs. So, your statement that being down 1 and down 2 is basically the same is false. Now, at some point in the game, it becomes late enough where you don't really care what the other team does--you might not get another shot to score and therefore you need to try to tie it up. Whenever that time of the game is, it is certainly not in the first half.

Oswlek · Dec 8, 2014

Nunchucks said:
Patriots offense was moving the ball much better and the Patriots defense was not getting stops. Much different situation.

Granted, but I think we are weighing the two score deficit differently. IMO, SD was already at panic time.

No matter how poorly their O was, they needed to do something eventually, right? It isn't like punting it with the hopes of getting two defensive scores was a realistic option. If you can't trust the offense to get 4 yards, how likely is it that you'll get a TD drive and a FG?

When a first down by NE all but ends the game, you want to give away as few possessions as possible. And even if you fail on 4th, the same necessary defensive stop likely gives you the ball back at the expense of only ~30 yards of field position.

At least, that's my thinking. It's certainly possible I'm wrong.

fxkane · Dec 8, 2014

Nunchucks said:
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"

I agree. Plus, a nasty defense can cause things to happen down inside the 15 yard line. I've seen this scenario work more often than the opposite. And have seen BB employ it over the years.

And it's possible that SD is strong on onside kicks. If not, they have the qb who can make big plays--and quickly get a team into field goal range.

Seacoast Fan · Dec 8, 2014

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

I was listening to sports talk radio this AM on the way to the airport in San Diego and everyone was pissed off about the decision to punt.

Lavictoire · Dec 8, 2014

SD punts...Martyball lives!!

TinhWoodhead · Dec 8, 2014

is it just me or do those yellow SD gloves look like flags when the players are on the ground?

San Diego's dumbest decision of the game

Oswlek

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

TinhWoodhead

In the Starting Line-Up

Shed83

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

JayNM

PatsFans.com Supporter

New England Pride

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

Oswlek

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Nunchucks

PatsFans.com Supporter

Nunchucks

PatsFans.com Supporter

New England Pride

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

Nunchucks

PatsFans.com Supporter

Oswlek

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Nunchucks

PatsFans.com Supporter

letekro

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Oswlek

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

fxkane

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Seacoast Fan

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

Lavictoire

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

TinhWoodhead

In the Starting Line-Up

Similar threads