Would Garrett Have Kicked FG Before Half?

[rags747]

How much would you have bet on the Patriots if you were told that Brady would throw for 505 yards, 3 td's and no interceptions and would never punt in the game? I would have lost my house!

 

[yimyammer]

We all know the EPIC fourth down pass to Foles right before half was the play of the game, but I am curious as to how many on this board think Garrett would have sent out the FG unit instead.

Serious question................I am 99.9% positive Garrett would have kicked the FG based on his past history

Dallas would have been flagged for too many men on the field on 3rd down because Garrett would have sent Bailey out on the field before the play was even over

 

[Idgit]

I'd like to see a few more years of teams adopting an ultra aggressive 4th down mindset, and more attempts to gain the ball back after a score, but you need certain things to get away with such risks like: a Great D.

It's always killed me that teams won't go for it when they should. Especially bad ones. If I'm coaching CLE last year, and we're 0-8, I'm almost never punting again. I'm just going for it. On sides after kickoffs, and laterals and big plays down the field a multiple of the NFL average. What do they have to lose?

 

[robjay04]

Here's the numbers for both teams for the last two seasons:

DAL
2017
19 attempts (8th)
52.6% (10th)

2016
9 attempts (29th)
88.9% (1st)

My guess is we were very good at 4th and very short in 2016, and limited the situations where we'd risk it. We weren't as good this year, and were probably in more convert-or-go-home situations that were lower percentage. That would account for the conversion rate drop off and the attempts increase.

PHI
2017
26 attempts (2nd)
65.4% (3rd)

2016
27 attempts (1st)
48.1% (17th)

And I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that Pederson's staff was pretty consistent about going for it more often because that's what the percentages say to do, and they were better at it this year because they had a better team in general. Which explains why the coaching decisions are about the same but the production is better.

These are obviously just my guesses, though.

65 percent is not a good number for that situation, in my opinion. Especially considering I bet the Pats are pretty good in those situations as well.

It was a ballsy call but I wouldn’t want my coach to make a habit of going for it there. A lot of good NFL coaches are conservative by nature and there is nothing wrong with that.

Dallas has actually been more aggressive than people realize. Fake punts, onside kicks...we also went for our share of 4th and 1s with a healthy Zeke. Garrett’s problem is his offense sucks, not that he is too conservative by nature.

 

[Kevinicus]

I sure would have. I’m sure Belichick would’ve as well.

If it backfired, he is the most hated man in Philly right now.

Just because a call worked doesn’t mean it was the smart decision.

The reverse is also true, and it's the entire basis for why teams don't go for it. Fear of something not working, even if it's the right thing.

 

[robjay04]

It's always killed me that teams won't go for it when they should. Especially bad ones. If I'm coaching CLE last year, and we're 0-8, I'm almost never punting again. I'm just going for it. On sides after kickoffs, and laterals and big plays down the field a multiple of the NFL average. What do they have to lose?

The Steelers do it often and Tomlin is murdered for it.

People don’t care that it works 70 percent of the time, it’s that 30 percent of the time that loses games that people care about. It’s an easy way to look like the dumbest guy on the field.

 

[robjay04]

The reverse is also true, and it's the entire basis for why teams don't go for it. Fear of something not working, even if it's the right thing.

I’m just not buying that taking a 35 percent chance or more of going into the half without points is a good decision..especially when Brady gets the ball back.

It worked, he’s a genius...it had a high chance of failing as well and would’ve likely lost the game.

 

[Idgit]

65 percent is not a good number for that situation, in my opinion. Especially considering I bet the Pats are pretty good in those situations as well.

It was a ballsy call but I wouldn’t want my coach to make a habit of going for it there. A lot of good NFL coaches are conservative by nature and there is nothing wrong with that.

Dallas has actually been more aggressive than people realize. Fake punts, onside kicks...we also went for our share of 4th and 1s with a healthy Zeke. Garrett’s problem is his offense sucks, not that he is too conservative by nature.

Liking this despite the last line. And despite the fact that I think we (and just about everybody else) ought to actually go for it *more*. You're right that we do a lot more of the fakes and flea flickers and going for it on 4th down than people remember, for whatever reason. And we also have Bailey, who's accurate at distance, and a ball control offense to take the air out of the end of games.

But it was a great call by Pederson yesterday, for sure. It was also the right call.

Belicheck made a similar gutsy call on the other side of the field in the red zone on the hurdle that didn't quite make it. He's getting lambasted today for pulling Butler instead of toasted for making a ballsy decision. Because his team lost.

 

[Idgit]

The Steelers do it often and Tomlin is murdered for it.

People don’t care that it works 70 percent of the time, it’s that 30 percent of the time that loses games that people care about. It’s an easy way to look like the dumbest guy on the field.

Yeah. Playing the odds presupposed you don't mind fans who don't know the math thinking you're dumb when you're actually smart. But you'd think the math alone would convince guys to risk being smart given their jobs depend on making the right decisions.

 

[Corso]

It's always killed me that teams won't go for it when they should. Especially bad ones. If I'm coaching CLE last year, and we're 0-8, I'm almost never punting again. I'm just going for it. On sides after kickoffs, and laterals and big plays down the field a multiple of the NFL average. What do they have to lose?

Oh yeah, except coaches like to look like they know what they're doing and this would risk their image as being a madman, but maybe that's what needed nowadays.
I mean... I love myself and I'm a bit mad!

 

[atlantacowboy]

Garret would be milking the clock late first quarter with a 3 point lead.

 

[Kevinicus]

I’m just not buying that taking a 35 percent chance or more of going into the half without points is a good decision..especially when Brady gets the ball back.

It worked, he’s a genius...it had a high chance of failing as well and would’ve likely lost the game.

I think Brady getting the ball back is exactly why a FG is a bad decision. Also, if it's 35%, that means you absolutely have to go for it. You are going to be losing a lot of points in the long run if you keep kicking it. 7 points 65% of the time and 0 points 35% of the time is much better than 3 points 100% of the time (which as we saw in this game is not 100%).

 

[DCowboyz]

JG plays too conservative. Which is why we never win. It will never change.

 

[rynochop]

Omg if he did and it didn't work all we'd hear about is coaching coaching coaching...players have to execute

 

[Idgit]

We were top 10 in attempts last season, but nobody cares. It's kind of awesome in a way, and kind of depressing how, when a group wants consensus, it'll try to bully one if it can't get one rationally.

It reminds me of a thread we had a couple years back when everybody was slamming the staff for it's challenge success rate, thinking we were one of the worst teams in the league at getting challenges right, when it turned out we were actually the best in the league at it, and I pointed that out only to get another two pages of people complaining about our challenge success rate.

 

[willia451]

We don't know what Garrett would have done. We only know what Garrett would have thought Jerry would have wanted him to do in that situation.

I think Jerry would have wanted Garrett to kick the FG. I don't know that for sure. But based on what I've seen Garrett do in the past relative to what he thinks Jerry would want him to do, it seems reasonable.

Because if Garrett had gone for it and failed, he'd be standing in front of The Man. Trying to explain himself and save his job.

Garrett likes his job and all the money I'm sure. So I'm going to say..............FG.

 

[Rayman70]

YES..no doubt...thus we lose the game. Thats how JG coaches..not to lose.

 

[Rayman70]

JG plays too conservative. Which is why we never win. It will never change.

Another words, JG sucks in situational moments.

 

[Aven8]

JG the aggressor.

 

[Zekeats]

Empty backfield draw with Prescott if he did go for it. We all know the plays by now.