You are here

Jump to content


Photo

The touchdown that bothers me


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

#81 5 Lombardis

5 Lombardis

    Professional Starter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,085 posts

Posted 10 August 2017 - 06:51 PM

What I had issue with is that when they got in the red zone, they still had chances to get the 1st downs and instead took shots at the end zone and settled for FG, and the non call on Wittens mugging,and you just can't give Rogers 35 seconds to play with, jmo

 

I've posted it a zillion times, but the worst case scenario should have been last second FG and go to OT. 



#82 Rogers

Rogers

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,006 posts
  • LocationTralfamadore

Posted 11 August 2017 - 12:25 AM

I've posted it a zillion times, but the worst case scenario should have been last second FG and go to OT.


I don't think they were playing for worst case scenario. They were playing to win.
  • kskboys likes this

#83 heathgs

heathgs

    Ring of Honor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,423 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio

Posted 18 August 2017 - 05:34 PM

I don't think they were playing for worst case scenario. They were playing to win.

 

It doesn't have to be either/or.  It needed to be both.  They could have still played to win while ensuring the worst case scenario was they kick a FG to force overtime.  Allowing the clock to keep running shortened the game but still allowed enough time to get into the end zone using smart play calling.  Atlanta pulled it off the next week, and NE almost did it in the SB but for a holding penalty.  Neither team allowed the opponent any time to match their score. 



#84 Rogers

Rogers

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,006 posts
  • LocationTralfamadore

Posted 26 August 2017 - 05:45 PM

It doesn't have to be either/or.  It needed to be both.  They could have still played to win while ensuring the worst case scenario was they kick a FG to force overtime.  Allowing the clock to keep running shortened the game but still allowed enough time to get into the end zone using smart play calling.  Atlanta pulled it off the next week, and NE almost did it in the SB but for a holding penalty.  Neither team allowed the opponent any time to match their score. 

 

I don't think that's as easy as you think.  Attempting to preserve enough time to score a TD to win, and running off time to keep the other team from getting the ball back with time left are opposing actions.    With 40-50 yards to go it's not so easy to find the perfect balance where you have the time needed to move downfield and score the go ahead touchdown, yet do so with no time, or next to no time left.  If you hold back too much trying to run clock you may not be running the plays that give you the best shot to get into the end zone. 


  • kskboys likes this

#85 heathgs

heathgs

    Ring of Honor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,423 posts
  • LocationSan Antonio

Posted 30 August 2017 - 02:59 AM

I don't think that's as easy as you think. Attempting to preserve enough time to score a TD to win, and running off time to keep the other team from getting the ball back with time left are opposing actions. With 40-50 yards to go it's not so easy to find the perfect balance where you have the time needed to move downfield and score the go ahead touchdown, yet do so with no time, or next to no time left. If you hold back too much trying to run clock you may not be running the plays that give you the best shot to get into the end zone.

But you aren't trying to run clock. If that were the case we simply sit in the ball. You just allow the clock to run. What should happen is you either throw an incomplete pass which stops the clock around :40 seconds or you complete another decent gain and should be around ~25 yard line or closer with about :25 seconds left in the game (if you don't go out of bounds) with one time out. Now you have time to work the either the siedleines but can even still work the middle of the field and use your timeout. If you do that you can throw into the end zone and settle for the FG if you have to.

The thing is we didn't need to give up a down to stop the clock at :50 seconds. That needed to be done around :25-30 seconds. You can still score a TD but you significantly cut the time off the clock if you do not. Both could have been accomplished.

Now, if you believe the spike was necessary at that time, do you believe we should have spiked it after the first play of the drive? If not, why?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users