Should have Onside Kick in OT

[Doomsday]

I am sorry but given the way the defense was gassed and getting abused more and more as the game went on, it made ZERO sense to me to kick off to the Saints. You HAVE to try an onside kick there.

No way were they going to stop them from at least getting a FG and 20 - 30 yards of field position is nothing in that scenario. If they do hold the Saints to a FG, then they have 4 downs to work with to win or tie the game.

I dont think you can make an argument that taking a shot to get the ball back isnt the ONLY move in that scenario.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

Pete Carroll disagrees.

 

[BulletBob]

I am sorry but given the way the defense was gassed and getting abused more and more as the game went on, it made ZERO sense to me to kick off to the Saints. You HAVE to try an onside kick there.

No way were they going to stop them from at least getting a FG and 20 - 30 yards of field position is nothing in that scenario. If they do hold the Saints to a FG, then they have 4 downs to work with to win or tie the game.

I dont think you can make an argument that taking a shot to get the ball back isnt the ONLY move in that scenario.

Not that I agree with your line of thinking, but given the context you provided, wouldn't the smarter, higher-percentage play have been to go for 2 points after Williams caught the final touchdown pass toward the end of regulation (instead of trying to recover an onside kick and having to drive the field for a touchdown in OT)?

 

[Boyzmamacita]

Not that I agree with your line of thinking, but given the context you provided, wouldn't the smarter, higher-percentage play have been to go for 2 points after Williams caught the final touchdown pass toward the end of regulation (instead of trying to recover an onside kick and having to drive the field for a touchdown in OT)?

Oh the horror if that 2 point conversion was unsuccessful, but I get that you're referencing his scenario. When Witten chose tails and the official said heads...

 

[Doomsday]

Pete Carroll disagrees.

Just cause Seattle lost doesnt mean it wasnt the right play, who is to say they wouldnt of lost if they kicked it off anyway?

 

[Frosty]

I am sorry but given the way the defense was gassed and getting abused more and more as the game went on, it made ZERO sense to me to kick off to the Saints. You HAVE to try an onside kick there.

No way were they going to stop them from at least getting a FG and 20 - 30 yards of field position is nothing in that scenario. If they do hold the Saints to a FG, then they have 4 downs to work with to win or tie the game.

I dont think you can make an argument that taking a shot to get the ball back isnt the ONLY move in that scenario.

It would take a HC who has a pair. That is willing to make bold moves to help a team in dire straits....that's not Garett's MO. He is a plug an play coach an refuses to be creative to help his team.

 

[foofighters]

Ya, at least it would have ended the suffering about a minute sooner...

 

[Deep_South]

In retrospect, probably the best thing we could have done to change the outcome of overtime would have been to call "heads".

 

[Zekeats]

In retrospect, probably the best thing we could have done to change the outcome of overtime would have been to call "heads".

It was the breast cancer awareness ribbon that burned us on that one. Gotta go ribbon every time.

 

[Future]

Not that I agree with your line of thinking, but given the context you provided, wouldn't the smarter, higher-percentage play have been to go for 2 points after Williams caught the final touchdown pass toward the end of regulation (instead of trying to recover an onside kick and having to drive the field for a touchdown in OT)?

That's what I would have done.

With a bad offense and a gassed defense, I didn't like our odds in OT.

 

[speedkilz88]

They could have gone for 2.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

Just cause Seattle lost doesnt mean it wasnt the right play, who is to say they wouldnt of lost if they kicked it off anyway?

It's too high risk of a play. You're basically conceding the game if they recover it. Even if we get the onside kick, we still have to score a TD to end the game. Playing the odds, I think kicking it deep, hoping to get a stop or hold them to a FG, and then getting the ball back has a much higher win probability.

 

[unionjack8]

we did the right thing on the kickoff. Its all we did right in overtime.

 

[erod]

I was for this. Save your defense for the second drive and hold them to a field goal. Maybe, you get the ball and end it right there.

I have wanted to go for two after the touchdown strike to Williams. Better odds there for this defense by that point.

 

[KingLerxst]

It would take a HC who has a pair. That is willing to make bold moves to help a team in dire straits....that's not Garett's MO. He is a plug an play coach an refuses to be creative to help his team.

Sure. And when one of those "ballsy" or bold decisions failed. You and everyone else would have been so quick to jump on him for making a "dumb" decision it would make our heads swim.
My goodness. The reaction on this board and the national media would have been epic if they go for two and miss it in that situation.Or blow an onside kick as some have suggested.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

i wanted 11 men on the field and no free 3 points to the saints.

outside of that, 2pt conversion

last time we played the saints i watched tony tie the game only for the defense to let brees march down the field for a game ending TD. no way I would have let that scenario happen again. But JG did!

 

[conner01]

Oh the horror if that 2 point conversion was unsuccessful, but I get that you're referencing his scenario. When Witten chose tails and the official said heads...

If they had went for two and failed then people would want Garret's head on a stick
Same if he had onside kicked
Everyone loves when something works but it's a bad call when it doesn't
That's just the mentality of fans
Don't blame Garrett for kicking extra point. That was the right call

 

[big dog cowboy]

Should have played defense on the Saints last possession in regulation. That would have given us a chance to win it and avoid OT all together.

 

[remdak]

Should have played defense on the Saints last possession in regulation. That would have given us a chance to win it and avoid OT all together.

I agree. Also, Gachkar should have just gone down to the ground with his injury after he got picked. That way, the refs would have stopped the game and the Cowboys would have had time to get in a sub who would be ready. Instead, he limped off and Wilson was late getting in and out of position.

 

[Frosty]

Sure. And when one of those "ballsy" or bold decisions failed. You and everyone else would have been so quick to jump on him for making a "dumb" decision it would make our heads swim.
My goodness. The reaction on this board and the national media would have been epic if they go for two and miss it in that situation.Or blow an onside kick as some have suggested.

Some might....I would rather see a HC pull out all the stops and try and help the team out.....I understand the risk...a hero or zero move...doing NOHTIN amounts as a ZERO move.....how did doing nothing work out in OT...got burned in 60seconds. Guess Sean Peyton was "dumb" for his on side kick in the Superbowl....