The 1:52 3rd down decision (re: The Break conversation)

[_sturt_]

Was a little surprised that there was agreement by everyone around the table on what they'd have rather seen McCarthy choose to do...



... because I think McCarthy had two very justifiable objectives.

Yes, defending a head coach I am... dangerous as that can be.

First, he was determined to get points. The almost last thing he wanted was to leave any chance that SEA could tie the game on a FG. So, once you make that decision, you've effectively established, then, you're definitely going for the FG on 4th down, no matter what happens on 3rd (ie, short of a first down or a TD).

Second, yes, you could run the ball on 3rd down to try to get the 1st. Or, you could take a shot at the end zone and pretty much win the game then and there.

I have zero problems with taking a shot at winning the game. Didn't work out, but the decision itself was stout.

Broaddus and Eagleton both passionately advocated for running the ball on both downs, and worst-case, turning the ball over on downs but having ran the clock to something in the neighborhood of 60 seconds left. Walker, not as passionate, but agreed.

Good heavens no.

That's still too much time, and especially when one of their weapons has burned you all night long with his speed... they could get to FG position very easily in that situation.

But what's crazy to me is they talk like it was/is so difficult for them to figure out McCarthy's thinking. Disagree, that's fine. But this wasn't rocket science. Even if it turned out to be a bad decision... and it didn't, of course... it was not hard to decipher the line of reason.

 

[Mannix]

That was a braindead fireable call....ESPECIALLY since it amounted to a long "fade route"....the lowest % pass route EVER known to man.

 

[75boyz]

That was a braindead fireable call....ESPECIALLY since it amounted to a long "fade route"....the lowest % pass route EVER known to man.

Yeah,
It ranked way up there in the coaching stupidity category no doubt.

 

[_sturt_]

Once you make the priority to get, at least, the FG on 4th down, the question is what to do on 3rd.

Once you decide you want to give yourself, at least, the chance to score the TD and win the game, the fade route is the safest... if there's an interception, so much more likely to be out of bounds. And a fade route to your best receiver? All the better.

Nah. Can disagree with the decision, again, like I said. But it's not hard to figure out what McCarthy was thinking. Not at all, really.

 

[Carson]

Worked against Seattle.

Didnt work against Jacksonville.

I still run, kick the 3 and they have 1 minute to score a TD

 

[DUO_CORE]

That's why we need Kellen; he would have tried to "jet sweep" them to death.

 

[Fmart322]

It was very Jason Garrett'ish

 

[Beaker42]

That was a braindead fireable call....ESPECIALLY since it amounted to a long "fade route"....the lowest % pass route EVER known to man.

Lamb should’ve crossed his face on the slant. TD. Fade route was a job-losing call.

 

[lkelly]

A first down increased the winning percentage more than a touchdown. That should have been the objective. I can’t gauge whether Mike’s math skills work well enough to process that.

 

[Cowboys5217]

Was a little surprised that there was agreement by everyone around the table on what they'd have rather seen McCarthy choose to do...



... because I think McCarthy had two very justifiable objectives.

Yes, defending a head coach I am... dangerous as that can be.

First, he was determined to get points. The almost last thing he wanted was to leave any chance that SEA could tie the game on a FG. So, once you make that decision, you've effectively established, then, you're definitely going for the FG on 4th down, no matter what happens on 3rd (ie, short of a first down or a TD).

Second, yes, you could run the ball on 3rd down to try to get the 1st. Or, you could take a shot at the end zone and pretty much win the game then and there.

I have zero problems with taking a shot at winning the game. Didn't work out, but the decision itself was stout.

Broaddus and Eagleton both passionately advocated for running the ball on both downs, and worst-case, turning the ball over on downs but having ran the clock to something in the neighborhood of 60 seconds left. Walker, not as passionate, but agreed.

Good heavens no.

That's still too much time, and especially when one of their weapons has burned you all night long with his speed... they could get to FG position very easily in that situation.

But what's crazy to me is they talk like it was/is so difficult for them to figure out McCarthy's thinking. Disagree, that's fine. But this wasn't rocket science. Even if it turned out to be a bad decision... and it didn't, of course... it was not hard to decipher the line of reason.

If you are going to play best case scenario then a run is still a better call as the RB could score a TD and "win it right then and there".

If you are going to play best case scenario then you go for a hail mary on every offensive play in your own territory.

It was a horrible tactical decision. It has ALWAYS been a horrible tactical decision to stop the clock for an opponent without timeouts.

Kneeling down would have been a better tactical call in that moment.

 

[Cowboys5217]

A first down increased the winning percentage more than a touchdown. That should have been the objective. I can’t gauge whether Mike’s math skills work well enough to process that.

It is clear he has no real idea of Game Theory or Risk/Reward Analysis. That decision violated both.

 

[DCreppinBoysfan]

I would’ve ran it but I wasn’t mad at the decision to pass. It was the playcall that bothered me. Freaky Mike could’ve called a better play. That was a very low percentage pass. I hope it wasn’t Daks main read.


Parcells always chose to put the game away no matter who the qb was:

 

[speedkilz88]

Cooks looked open.at.the sticks, Dak just liked the matchup with CeeDee.

 

[_sturt_]

I still run, kick the 3 and they have 1 minute to score a TD

Viable choice. Maybe my choice, too.

But here's the other consideration not brought up yet... in that specific situation, the defense has to respect, if not has to be inclined to believe that you're going to prioritize getting the first down.

That makes them plausibly more vulnerable to give up the TD catch.

That was a very low percentage pass. I hope it wasn’t Daks main read.

I think it was the main read, and here's why. Notice how CeeDee ran that route. It was designed to get the CB to bite on a short crossing route... which goes back to what I just said... they were likely attempting to exploit that vulnerability of being predisposed to thinking McCarthy was aiming at a first down... and instead, trying to surprise them by running the end zone fade.

And while I agree it's low percentage from that distance (fades, btw, are not low percentage from closer distance from my understanding of the stats)... it was still a reasonable choice because to have thrown the ball where you raise the chance of interception would have raised the risk of giving SEA the ball at the 25 (or worse, remembering what the Dolphins did to the Jets on Sunday), with all that time to go down the field, likely not just for a chance to go up by a FG, but a chance to get over the goal line.

A first down increased the winning percentage more than a touchdown.

I heard that somewhere today, but whoever said it admitted that the differences were so close that it hardly mattered... and again, that's supportive of my assertion... feel free to advocate for a different call as being better, but don't sit there and pretend you can't figure out what the head coach was thinking. I can't be convinced you even seriously tried. I think what happens is that those guys will sit in the press box together, and when any two of them happen to have the same reaction... and in this case, they discover another person thought the same thing... they just conclude that they own the wisdom, and the head coach must have had a mini-stroke in the moment.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Worked against Seattle.

Didnt work against Jacksonville.

I still run, kick the 3 and they have 1 minute to score a TD

yep

 

[Jarntt]

There should be consensus by everyone as it was the obvious decision to make them go the length of the field to have to score a TD with no timeouts in a minute

 

[Jarntt]

Viable choice. Maybe my choice, too.

But here's the other consideration not brought up yet... in that specific situation, the defense has to respect, if not has to be inclined to believe that you're going to prioritize getting the first down.

That makes them plausibly more vulnerable to give up the TD catch.

so the justification is the defense won’t expect us to do something stupid, so let’s do something stupid?

 

[ksadler1]

By throwing that low % pass, they essentially gifted the Seahawks with a timeout and an extra 40 seconds on the clock. That could have been a critical mistake and probably would have been if Parsons hadn't disrupted that last 4th down play. There was still 1:07 left after that.

 

[coult44]

That was a braindead fireable call....ESPECIALLY since it amounted to a long "fade route"....the lowest % pass route EVER known to man.

you can’t be part of this conversation if you think “the fade”’was The call. Sure a pass play was the call, Dak chose who to throw it to.

 

[lkelly]

I heard that somewhere today, but whoever said it admitted that the differences were so close that it hardly mattered... and again, that's supportive of my assertion... feel free to advocate for a different call as being better, but don't sit there and pretend you can't figure out what the head coach was thinking. I can't be convinced you even seriously tried. I think what happens is that those guys will sit in the press box together, and when any two of them happen to have the same reaction... and in this case, they discover another person thought the same thing... they just conclude that they own the wisdom, and the head coach must have had a mini-stroke in the moment.

Not really sure of your rambling point, but there’s a reason smart players and coaches instruct their players/teammates to go down once a first down is secured that enables a team to run out the clock. Outside of a point differential tiebreaker or a gambling interest (which has a whole different discussion), the odds are always in favor of the kneel down. The number of fumbles in that situation have to be close to zero (I can’t recall one). I’ve seen plenty of onside kicks and Hail Mary plays. Throwing a TD vs a pass for a first down (even going out of bounds after the catch) in that situation was a poor math decision. I won’t presume to know whether it was Mike’s or Dak’s but neither has a great track record in time sensitive situations.