Last drive: 4th and 5

[Nova]

You have to go for it. It was an absolute no-brainer and this team is mind-numbingly stupid.

There was only one play that would absolutely, positively end the game at that point, and we decided not to even try?

Kick a FG and they get the ball back and can still win... it's not like teams haven't scored in less than a minute without using timeouts. All it takes is one play.

There are far more cons by not going for it.

 

[AbeBeta]

Are you kidding me? How does that end the game? You don't convert and the clock STOPS. You give the Lions the ball with maybe 30 yards to go to get in FG position.

 

[theebs]

We should have been throwing on first down and playing to win.

THink back to the Denver game and the first play after the interception. Manning knew getting a first down would win the game because we couldn't stop the clock essentially if we got a first down.
He went to the line of scrimmage saw the one on one outside with carr while we played the run and he threw a backshoulder fade for a first down which was killer.

Had we come out yesterday and thrown on first down or second down and got a first it would have been over. Even if romo drops back and takes a sack if you what you want is not there its ok because they have to burn a timeout.

but nope, our dopey head coach elects to run into a pile.

play to win like manning and Denver did.

 

[AbeBeta]

Seriously. It is like some of you posters have absolutely no sense at all.

 

[AbeBeta]

We should have been throwing on first down and playing to win.

THink back to the Denver game and the first play after the interception. Manning knew getting a first down would win the game because we couldn't stop the clock essentially if we got a first down.
He went to the line of scrimmage saw the one on one outside with carr while we played the run and he threw a backshoulder fade for a first down which was killer.

Had we come out yesterday and thrown on first down or second down and got a first it would have been over. Even if romo drops back and takes a sack if you what you want is not there its ok because they have to burn a timeout.

but nope, our dopey head coach elects to run into a pile.

play to win like manning and Denver did.

It was the correct strategy. It went wrong because of the penalty, which incidentally is much more likely in a passing situation.

 

[theebs]

It was the correct strategy. It went wrong because of the penalty, which incidentally is much more likely in a passing situation.

There is no correct strategy. Getting the job done is what matters and after getting stuffed on the previous drive the ball should have been in the hands of the most talented player in the most crucial moment.

A first down and the game is over.

 

[AbeBeta]

There is no correct strategy. Getting the job done is what matters and after getting stuffed on the previous drive the ball should have been in the hands of the most talented player in the most crucial moment.

A first down and the game is over.

An incomplete pass and you've saved them a timeout. And we'd have heard all week about what a poor time manager Garrett is.

 

[Nova]

Are you kidding me? How does that end the game? You don't convert and the clock STOPS. You give the Lions the ball with maybe 30 yards to go to get in FG position.

That's the kind of old thinking that lost us the game. And I'm not trying to insult you, it seems to make more sense up front... extend the lead, make them have to drive the field for a TD. It's much harder to do (or so it seems).

You end the game if you convert. You still have a shot of losing in either scenario of A.) Kicking a FG or B.) not converting.

I understand the difference. It's easier for the other team to kick a FG and tie the game up. Well... so? You still have a shot in that case, too.

 

[theebs]

An incomplete pass and you've saved them a timeout. And we'd have heard all week about what a poor time manager Garrett is.

If its incomplete its second and ten and you throw again.

Its about playing to win, just like Denver did against us in the same situation and just like Detroit did on the 4th down.

Its insane that we have a head coach who goes for a 56 yard field goal in a tie game on the road but doesn't have the guts to let his most talented player win the game at crunch time.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

One improbable loss is rotten luck. Multiple improbable losses during your tenure as head coach, maybe it's you.

 

[AbeBeta]

That's the kind of old thinking that lost us the game. And I'm not trying to insult you, it seems to make more sense up front... extend the lead, make them have to drive the field for a TD. It's much harder to do (or so it seems).

You end the game if you convert. You still have a shot of losing in either scenario of A.) Kicking a FG or B.) not converting.

I understand the difference. It's easier for the other team to kick a FG and tie the game up. Well... so? You still have a shot in that case, too.

No, you are totally wrong. Percentage wise you want to make them use their timeouts. The last thing you are going to do is save one for them

 

[Nova]

One improbable loss is rotten luck. Multiple improbably losses during your tenure as head coach, maybe it's you.

One would think that he'd realize that and call a game a little more desperate rather than thinking he has control.

 

[AbeBeta]

If its incomplete its second and ten and you throw again.

Its about playing to win, just like Denver did against us in the same situation and just like Detroit did on the 4th down.

Its insane that we have a head coach who goes for a 56 yard field goal in a tie game on the road but doesn't have the guts to let his most talented player win the game at crunch time.

And if it is incomplete on 2nd and 10 you throw it on 3rd and 10 ... and then you are giving the ball back with over a minute left plus detroit has two time outs.

 

[Nova]

No, you are totally wrong. Percentage wise you want to make them use their timeouts. The last thing you are going to do is save one for them

They were out of timeouts at that point. What are you talking about?

For the record, I think they handled the drive okay at that point... things were still salvageable. I'd rather have seen a QB kneel on 3rd down, but once the penalty happened and Schwartz accepted, there was only one course of action that made more sense.

 

[AbeBeta]

One would think that he'd realize that and call a game a little more desperate rather than thinking he has control.

You are correct. He is an idiot for thinking that we'd be able to stop Detroit on defense. I mean we hadn't done that since the previous drive.

 

[ConstantReboot]

You have to go for it. It was an absolute no-brainer and this team is mind-numbingly stupid.

There was only one play that would absolutely, positively end the game at that point, and we decided not to even try?

Kick a FG and they get the ball back and can still win... it's not like teams haven't scored in less than a minute without using timeouts. All it takes is one play.

There are far more cons by not going for it.

I have to disagree. The problem started to happen long before we got to this stage of the game. Thats what happens when the defense gives you 4 turnovers and you don't convert. Thats what happens when your offense was awful and can't move the ball even against a weak pass defense team like Detroit. Thats what happens when you try to ball and fail to do so many times. We should have never gotten to this stage of the game; period.

 

[AbeBeta]

They were out of timeouts at that point. What are you talking about?

For the record, I think they handled the drive okay at that point... things were still salvageable. I'd rather have seen a QB kneel on 3rd down, but once the penalty happened and Schwartz accepted, there was only one course of action that made more sense.

Wait? You are talking about throwing the ball on 3rd down. When Detroit is out of timeouts?

Good lord. This idea is even sillier than I first thought. That's a 40 second swing in game clock on an incompletion.

 

[Nova]

You are correct. He is an idiot for thinking that we'd be able to stop Detroit on defense. I mean we hadn't done that since the previous drive.

And you think we were likely to do that again? I certainly didn't. I actually think that, because we stopped them previously, they had a much better shot at coming right back in smacking us.

Not to mention, the secondary was pretty banged up by then.

 

[Nova]

Wait? You are talking about throwing the ball on 3rd down. When Detroit is out of timeouts?

Good lord. This idea is even sillier than I first thought. That's a 40 second swing in game clock on an incompletion.

No. 4th and 5. Sorry for the confusion. Passing on 3rd down would have been dumb.

 

[theebs]

And if it is incomplete on 2nd and 10 you throw it on 3rd and 10 ... and then you are giving the ball back with over a minute left plus detroit has two time outs.

Not if you complete the pass.

You can not be scared, that is why we lose late. Worrying about this type of thing. I doubt manning was scared to throw in the same situation nor were his coaches.