Be Honest, How Many Of You Wanted To Kick A Field Goal Instead Of Going For It?

[SVN]

and then you still need a td, anyway, only you're on your own 20 rather than broncos 16.
so, I guess in imaginationland when you're down 5, assuming the kick is even good, it's easy to waltz down the field + score that td, but when you're down 8 in reality it can't get done.

it's bad enough that they lost, but these threads are nonsensical - let it go.

Its nothing nonsensical. I am not questioning BB the coach.Just the call. Even if you got the TD you still need another score to win . An offense which did nothing all day had a chance to build some confidence and they had started to move the ball in the 4th. . Its okay you disagree but doesnt' mean its not debatable.

 

[eom]

I understood the call to go for it at 4th and 1 with 5 min left needing a TD. I was actually thinking FG, but i was not objecting the call. In hindshight if DA didn't get those 2-3 extra yards it might have been better for us as the FG made more sense. Oh well, hindsight is 20/20

4th + 4 you go for it, and that's not even a question

you're still down 5 w/6 min to play, needing a td to win, anyway, but in much worse field position.
in 12 previous drives the pats had held the broncos scoreless on less than a 1:40 ToP only once, and that was on the hillman play where it was ruled a fumble on challenge the 2nd play of the drive, which was clearly not happening again with 6 min to play, but all these geniuses knew we'd hold the broncos to 1:21 + 26 seconds on the next 2 drives.

all these geniuses know for sure that not only would we have had time for that 3rd fg, but that we'd bang all 3 through, because fg are automatic, unlike extra points.

in 12 previous drives we scored a td once, on a 22 yd possession, and managed 30+ yds only twice, but these geniuses would have us pass up 2 chances from the redzone because we could easily drive down the field 3x starting from our own 20 -- they knew that would happen.
when you hit that fg there's a good chance you start on your own 20, fyi, and if you miss.....

in their 7 previous punts the broncos had averaged 45 yds, including punts of 26 + 38, with a 50 yarder being only 22 net after the return, but these geniuses knew the broncos would ball out with a game long 54 yarder followed up by a 52 yarder, to make those last couple drives a little longer than they might've been.
we were actually able to score on that 3rd drive because we started at the 50 following a punt return, rather than our own 20 after a kickoff, and we miraculously had a little time left on the clock -- but nevermind all that, crying makes everything better.

 

[Observer]

Felt 100% that we needed to kick a field goal. I also thought that if BB decided to go for it there, he thought we were losing the game.

 

[Kontradiction]

4th + 4 you go for it, and that's not even a question

you're still down 5 w/6 min to play, needing a td to win, anyway, but in much worse field position.
in 12 previous drives the pats had held the broncos scoreless on less than a 1:40 ToP only once, and that was on the hillman play where it was ruled a fumble on challenge the 2nd play of the drive, which was clearly not happening again with 6 min to play, but all these geniuses knew we'd hold the broncos to 1:21 + 26 seconds on the next 2 drives.

all these geniuses know for sure that not only would we have had time for that 3rd fg, but that we'd bang all 3 through, because fg are automatic, unlike extra points.

in 12 previous drives we scored a td once, on a 22 yd possession, and managed 30+ yds only twice, but these geniuses would have us pass up 2 chances from the redzone because we could easily drive down the field 3x starting from our own 20 -- they knew that would happen.
when you hit that fg there's a good chance you start on your own 20, fyi, and if you miss.....

in their 7 previous punts the broncos had averaged 45 yds, including punts of 26 + 38, with a 50 yarder being only 22 net after the return, but these geniuses knew the broncos would ball out with a game long 54 yarder followed up by a 52 yarder, to make those last couple drives a little longer than they might've been.
we were actually able to score on that 3rd drive because we started at the 50 following a punt return, rather than our own 20 after a kickoff, and we miraculously had a little time left on the clock -- but nevermind all that, crying makes everything better.

The object of the game is to score points. When you have a defense that was stuffing Denver all game and you're confident they will get you the ball back quickly (as they did), you take the points in a tight game like that. The Patriots weren't down enough to warrant going for it. They did and it was an uncharacteristic coaching mistake by Belichick. He's human and is prone to them from time to time.

 

[eom]

Its nothing nonsensical. I am not questioning BB the coach.Just the call. Even if you got the TD you still need another score to win . An offense which did nothing all day had a chance to build some confidence and they had started to move the ball in the 4th. . Its okay you disagree but doesnt' mean its not debatable.

everything's debatable -- I live in chicago and there are homeless people debating stuff downtown every day, but this reply is still ridiculous.
that '2nd score' you keep clinging to like sarah palin is a 2 point conversion that has roughly a league wide 50% success rate, not an 80 yd drive from your own 20.

even if you miss that, your own assumption is that they quickly stuff denver, in which case they're in great position to try to win it with a fg.
if you kick the fg there you obviously can't win it with that follow up fg, so stop talking nonsense like it has some merit -- you have absolutely no clue if you're even getting a chance at a 3rd fg, let alone hitting all 3.
some people just can't ever admit being wrong.

 

[fnordcircle]

I said to my wife: "I want them to go for it here, but the smart play is the FG." I was pretty surprised when we went for it.

I think that going for it was a good indicator that they knew our offense was in trouble and might not get that far again.

 

[eom]

The object of the game is to score points. When you have a defense that was stuffing Denver all game and you're confident they will get you the ball back quickly (as they did), you take the points in a tight game like that. The Patriots weren't down enough to warrant going for it. They did and it was an uncharacteristic coaching mistake by Belichick. He's human and is prone to them from time to time.

actually, that would be incorrect -- if the goal of the game is simply to score points, then you just kick the fg + win, but this is VERY obviously not the case
the goal of the game is simply to score more points than the other guy, and if you can't even understand that much maybe you shouldn't be commenting on this at all -- the point being, going for it gives you a better chance of achieving that goal, which is why he went for it, which was the obvious call.

if you put up $2 to my $1 on a coin flip + take my $, that doesn't mean you made a smart decision.
but I guess everything's a mistake when it doesn't work out -- funny you don't have a list of all the mistakes he made winning games.

edit: and btw, attempting fg doesn't score you any points -- only hitting them

 

[LightSkinSmurf]

and then you still need a td, anyway, only you're on your own 20 rather than broncos 16.
so, I guess in imaginationland when you're down 5, assuming the kick is even good, it's easy to waltz down the field + score that td, but when you're down 8 in reality it can't get done.

it's bad enough that they lost, but these threads are nonsensical - let it go.

Huh? Yes we would have needed a TD either way but by kicking a FG you eliminate needing a 2 point conversion. You know, that play we lost on? That one. Idk why you're acting like going for it or not isn't debatable. Just because you disagree that doesn't mean the topic isn't debatable. Its VERY debatable regardless of which side of the fence you're on. Also, nobody is saying it would have been easy to go down the field and score a TD. We are saying that we should have taken the points, trusted the defense to get a stop, and give the ball back to brady with a chance to win the game instead of tie it while also needing a 2 point conversion to accomplish that.

Again, its fine you disagree... But you acting like your position is without question the correct one is comical to say the least.

 

[SVN]

everything's debatable -- I live in chicago and there are homeless people debating stuff downtown every day, but this reply is still ridiculous.
that '2nd score' you keep clinging to like sarah palin is a 2 point conversion that has roughly a league wide 50% success rate, not an 80 yd drive from your own 20.

even if you miss that, your own assumption is that they quickly stuff denver, in which case they're in great position to try to win it with a fg.
if you kick the fg there you obviously can't win it with that follow up fg, so stop talking nonsense like it has some merit -- you have absolutely no clue if you're even getting a chance at a 3rd fg, let alone hitting all 3.
some people just can't ever admit being wrong.

WOW. Great reply. Thanks for being nice.

 

[eom]

I said to my wife: "I want them to go for it here, but the smart play is the FG." I was pretty surprised when we went for it.

I think that going for it was a good indicator that they knew our offense was in trouble and might not get that far again.

I understand guy psychology, and maybe it's more like people psychology in general, where everybody thinks they know what to do because they're smart + the next guy is dumb, but belichick is a smart guy, and a smart coach, who can see what the smart play was -- maybe you should rethink what the dumb play was.

 

[eom]

Huh? Yes we would have needed a TD either way but by kicking a FG you eliminate needing a 2 point conversion. You know, that play we lost on? That one. Idk why you're acting like going for it or not isn't debatable. Just because you disagree that doesn't mean the topic isn't debatable. Its VERY debatable regardless of which side of the fence you're on. Also, nobody is saying it would have been easy to go down the field and score a TD. We are saying that we should have taken the points, trusted the defense to get a stop, and give the ball back to brady with a chance to win the game instead of tie it while also needing a 2 point conversion to accomplish that.

Again, its fine you disagree... But you acting like your position is without question the correct one is comical to say the least.

I think there's a flat earth society who feels exactly the same

 

[eom]

Huh? Yes we would have needed a TD either way but by kicking a FG you eliminate needing a 2 point conversion. You know, that play we lost on? That one. Idk why you're acting like going for it or not isn't debatable. Just because you disagree that doesn't mean the topic isn't debatable. Its VERY debatable regardless of which side of the fence you're on. Also, nobody is saying it would have been easy to go down the field and score a TD. We are saying that we should have taken the points, trusted the defense to get a stop, and give the ball back to brady with a chance to win the game instead of tie it while also needing a 2 point conversion to accomplish that.

Again, its fine you disagree... But you acting like your position is without question the correct one is comical to say the least.

btw, all this insistence on getting the ball to brady + trusting him to drive 80 yds is pretty ####### hilarious coming from people who don't even trust him to get a single yard or a 16 yd td drive when he already has the ball.

 

[Ring 6]

I instantly wanted the field for multiple reasons. I didnt like the idea of needing a 2point conversion and felt that a field goal w/ 6 min to go would eliminate that from the equation. And even if we had tied at that point we still would have had to rely on the d to stop them from scoring again within 6 minutes and we had all our timeouts.

Let gostowski kick. It felt somewhat similar to 07 sb when we bypassed a 50 yard fg

What you are overlooking is the chance that we would get another chance to score the TD. At that point the only one we scored came on a drive started at the +25. We couldn't convert a 3rd down to save our life and Brady had no time to throw.

Look at it this way. What was more likely? Converting that 4th down, or driving all the way down the field again to get back into that position?

 

[LightSkinSmurf]

What you are overlooking is the chance that we would get another chance to score the TD. At that point the only one we scored came on a drive started at the +25. We couldn't convert a 3rd down to save our life and Brady had no time to throw.

Look at it this way. What was more likely? Converting that 4th down, or driving all the way down the field again to get back into that position?

I think its more likely ghost makes the field goal and puts us in position to not need a 2 point conversion later on. Nobody is saying driving for a TD would have been easy. However us getting a chance to drive for a TD and WIN the game, not just tie it, I think was very probable considering how our defense was playing. I knew, or should I say strongly felt that if we didn't eliminate needing a two point conversion while we still had the chance it would come back to bite us.

 

[Kontradiction]

actually, that would be incorrect -- if the goal of the game is simply to score points, then you just kick the fg + win, but this is VERY obviously not the case
the goal of the game is simply to score more points than the other guy, and if you can't even understand that much maybe you shouldn't be commenting on this at all --

Semantics, but you get the point. At the time they made that decision, and with the way the defense was playing, the Patriots had 1-2 possessions remaining and, during that part of the game, they were moving the ball better than they had at any other point. If you take the field goal there, the ensuing possession wins it because, guess what, the defense got the ball back. You take the points, trust your defense, and put the ball back into the GOAT's hands to do what he's done so many times throughout his career: win you the game in the waning minutes. Turns out that's exactly what he did. For a coach that preaches situational football, it's shocking that he panicked and made the decision he did. But, like I said, he's human.

the point being, going for it gives you a better chance of achieving that goal, which is why he went for it, which was the obvious call.

No, it really doesn't. As a matter of fact, if he had "settled" for 3 on each attempt, they could have been in the position at the end to kick the field goal and actually win it. But he didn't put any trust in his defense or his quarterback's late game heroics. It cost him and the team.

if you put up $2 to my $1 on a coin flip + take my $, that doesn't mean you made a smart decision.
but I guess everything's a mistake when it doesn't work out -- funny you don't have a list of all the mistakes he made winning games.

It wasn't a mistake because it didn't work out. It was a mistake because it was a dumb thing to do with the way that his defense was schooling Manning and Denver's offense and with the way his offense was moving the ball as compared to the first half. This is actually very simple stuff.

 

[SVN]

 

[fnordcircle]

maybe you should rethink what the dumb play was.

I'm telling you what I said on 3rd down before we knew what the choice was going to be. What's to rethink? The OP wanted to know people's honest thoughts before/during the choice to go for it.

 

[eom]

I'm telling you what I said on 3rd down before we knew what the choice was going to be. What's to rethink? .

your capability to assess what the 'smart' play was.

 

[Spiral]

Not change the subject, but I'm curious: how many people think BB should have called a timeout after the 1st and goal run by Beast Mode in last year's SB?

 

[eom]

bottomline, this would never happen, but had they made that bonehead call to kick the fg + then lost, the exact same people would be up in here pointing out belichick's 'mistakes'.