56 yard FG (1 Viewer)

[Sweetness_34]

So do people realize that if the Vikings had just gone for the run like everyone now seems to be saying, they would get 3 yards at best making it a 53 yard FG (they were at the 56 yard FG range at the time).

And how many times you yell at the TV when your coach gets conservative and then the FG kicker misses the FG. Just ask Charger fans.

My point - the FG was not a gimme; they could have missed it at least 50% of the time. The Saints were going to push up the middle to stop the run. Rolling Favre out was a great call since it avoids the sack. Now throwing across the body was Favre's fault and he should have known better but things like that happen. Every QB makes dumb picks; Manning and Brady included.

I think the bigger blame should go for the 2 plays earlier when they ran the ball to the outside on 2 slow developing plays instead of running behind Hutch, your best OL.

Just my 2 cents....next time you blame your coach for going conservative (see Herm Edwards, **** Jauron, any of the defensive coaches etc), remember that. Last night and the call by Belichik against the Colts shows there are some coaches out there who "try to win the game .... hello". If the play does not work out, that is fine. Just like in poker, I would rather lose playing aggressive than be a scared beotch and lose being conservative.

 

[John 14:6]

There's a lot of talk this morning about the 12-men in the huddle penalty killing us. IMO they should have been trying to get a lot closer to the end zone as opposed to letting time run off the way they did. 50+ yards it too much to ask for from any kicker.

 

[CalBear]

Just my 2 cents....next time you blame your coach for going conservative (see Herm Edwards, **** Jauron, any of the defensive coaches etc), remember that. Last night and the call by Belichik against the Colts shows there are some coaches out there who "try to win the game .... hello". If the play does not work out, that is fine. Just like in poker, I would rather lose playing aggressive than be a scared beotch and lose being conservative.

But what if you would win playing conservatively? Would you rather lose playing aggressively or win playing conservatively?In any case, I don't think there was anything wrong with that call; they just didn't have the right QB to pull it off. The real coaching problem was putting 12 men in the huddle coming out of a timeout. Inexcusable.

 

[Titus Pullo]

to starting a new thread on this instead of posting it here and just repeating what others have already stated.

 

[Breesisdaman]

A 56 yard field goal? Like the one this guy is talking about?

 

[David Yudkin]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.

Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

 

[CalBear]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

The line of scrimmage was the 38; Favre released the ball at the 41 while he was moving forward and to his right. When he released the ball, the closest downfield defender was at the 31, and moving away from the line of scrimmage. The only defender near the line of scrimmage who could make a play on Favre is Remi Ayodele, who's listed at 318 and that was before he hit the buffet table a few times. It doesn't look like Ayodele had an angle on Favre.If Favre had run, he certainly would have gotten back to the line of scrimmage; he probably could have run for the sideline and gotten inside the 35. The kick still would have been from 50+ yards, but not 55. (I don't know where the 56 number is coming from; the line of scrimmage was right on the 38). He also had Berrian open on the sideline at about the 30, though Berrian may not have been ready to receive a pass. As a Cal fan I was disappointed to not see Longwell get a chance to win it, though I didn't really care which team won. (Scott Fujita got a fumble recovery for the Saints). Longwell is a great kicker, 61% from 50+ for his career, and it's in a dome. It may or may not have happened, but the INT clearly blew a good chance to win the game.

 

[TommyGilmore]

For the year, kickers made 57% of field goals over 50 yards (61 of 107). Of course, most of those kicks were in the 50-55 range, so I think it's safe to say that Longwell's chances were less than 50%.

 

[Jeremy]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

Favre was running pretty well rolling out of the pocket. He easily could have gotten enough yards to at least make it a reachable FG attempt for Longwell. Even 4 yards makes it a 52 yarder in a dome. I gotta think Longwell has the leg for that. And if he waits one more half second, he's got Berrian open on the sideline for an 8 or 10 yard gain.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

The line of scrimmage was the 38; Favre released the ball at the 41 while he was moving forward and to his right. When he released the ball, the closest downfield defender was at the 31, and moving away from the line of scrimmage. The only defender near the line of scrimmage who could make a play on Favre is Remi Ayodele, who's listed at 318 and that was before he hit the buffet table a few times. It doesn't look like Ayodele had an angle on Favre.If Favre had run, he certainly would have gotten back to the line of scrimmage; he probably could have run for the sideline and gotten inside the 35. The kick still would have been from 50+ yards, but not 55. (I don't know where the 56 number is coming from; the line of scrimmage was right on the 38). He also had Berrian open on the sideline at about the 30, though Berrian may not have been ready to receive a pass. As a Cal fan I was disappointed to not see Longwell get a chance to win it, though I didn't really care which team won. (Scott Fujita got a fumble recovery for the Saints). Longwell is a great kicker, 61% from 50+ for his career, and it's in a dome. It may or may not have happened, but the INT clearly blew a good chance to win the game.

But what you're failing to bring into your argument is that Farve was injured. He had a sprained ankle and just taking off and taking another shot didn't register to the 40 year old. He thought he could make a play with his arm because he knew he needed yardage to get a realistic shot at a FG.Why again did he feel he needed the yardage?Oh ya, he marched them down the field and got them into field goal position already. The same guy you claim isn't the right QB for the job, which makes no sense. The 12th man in the huddle was absolutely ridiculous and was the play of the game, after a timeout of all things.They would have ran the ball 1 more time, giving them about a 50 yard field goal, if they busted it for a little more then obviously a shorter one. That penalty was absolutely huge.If you guys want to hate on Farve, feel free and get in line with the rest. The guy will be gone soon enough and you can find someone else to hate on when he's gone. Either way, good luck finding someone who will ever be tougher and more of a gamer than Brett Farve.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

Favre was running pretty well rolling out of the pocket. He easily could have gotten enough yards to at least make it a reachable FG attempt for Longwell. Even 4 yards makes it a 52 yarder in a dome. I gotta think Longwell has the leg for that. And if he waits one more half second, he's got Berrian open on the sideline for an 8 or 10 yard gain.

I don't know exactly how severe the sprain was but I do know when I've had a sprained ankle, I could be going one way pretty good once I got my momentum going but stopping and turning direction to gain speed like Farve would have had to do is a different story.Would Farve do it over and run it now regardless of the pain, even if he knew it meant a broken ankle to make the cut? He probably would.......but he didn't. He threw the ball to make a play he wouldn't have had to make if someone after a timeout wasn't the 12th man in the huddle.

 

[Lobary]

The line of scrimmage was the 38; Favre released the ball at the 41 while he was moving forward and to his right. When he released the ball, the closest downfield defender was at the 31, and moving away from the line of scrimmage. The only defender near the line of scrimmage who could make a play on Favre is Remi Ayodele, who's listed at 318 and that was before he hit the buffet table a few times. It doesn't look like Ayodele had an angle on Favre.If Favre had run, he certainly would have gotten back to the line of scrimmage; he probably could have run for the sideline and gotten inside the 35. The kick still would have been from 50+ yards, but not 55. (I don't know where the 56 number is coming from; the line of scrimmage was right on the 38).

Having watched the replay many times now on dvr, I can confidently state that there is no way Favre would've made inside the 35 yd line and would've been very lucky to make it back to the original line of scrimmage. (For those that still have the game recorded, watch the reverse angle replay FOX showed in the timeout between the end of regulation and the OT coin flip and you'll see why). There were not one but TWO defenders (a DB and an LB) within ten yards of him from where he released the ball, both of them spying on him to make sure he didn't run for it. If he'd run for it, they almost certainly would've closed that distance quickly and kept him within the 37 yd line. That's a 54 yd FG attempt in the most trying of circumstances. I wholeheartedly agree with David Yudkin and have been making the same argument with friends at work all day. Everyone is talking about that interception as if Longwell was in position to hit a chip shot field goal when, realistically, he would've been attempting his season long.And for those of you who think that FG attempt carries no risk, ask Vikings fans what happened when Longwell lined up for a 51-yd FG attempt at the end of the first half of the SF game.

 

[David Yudkin]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

Favre was running pretty well rolling out of the pocket. He easily could have gotten enough yards to at least make it a reachable FG attempt for Longwell. Even 4 yards makes it a 52 yarder in a dome. I gotta think Longwell has the leg for that. And if he waits one more half second, he's got Berrian open on the sideline for an 8 or 10 yard gain.

After watching the replay, Favre is at the 42 and still angling to the sideline with a LB right in front of him square to him at the 32. With Favre pulling up to throw, the defender stops and jumps to defend the pass. If Farve kept going, maybe he gets to the 37 if you split the difference and he slid to the ground. That's still a 54 yard FG attempt. Maybe he makes it, maybe he doesn't, but it's far from a gimme chip shot.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

The line of scrimmage was the 38; Favre released the ball at the 41 while he was moving forward and to his right. When he released the ball, the closest downfield defender was at the 31, and moving away from the line of scrimmage. The only defender near the line of scrimmage who could make a play on Favre is Remi Ayodele, who's listed at 318 and that was before he hit the buffet table a few times. It doesn't look like Ayodele had an angle on Favre.If Favre had run, he certainly would have gotten back to the line of scrimmage; he probably could have run for the sideline and gotten inside the 35. The kick still would have been from 50+ yards, but not 55. (I don't know where the 56 number is coming from; the line of scrimmage was right on the 38).

Having watched the replay many times now on dvr, I can confidently state that there is no way Favre would've made inside the 35 yd line and would've been very lucky to make it back to the original line of scrimmage. There were not one but TWO defenders (a DB and an LB) within ten yards of him from where he released the ball, both of them spying on him to make sure he didn't run for it. If he'd run for it, they almost certainly would've closed that distance quickly and kept him within the 37 yd line. That's a 54 yd FG attempt in the most trying of circumstances. I wholeheartedly agree with David Yudkin and have been making the same argument with friends at work all day. Everyone is talking about that interception as if Longwell was in position to hit a chip shot field goal when, realistically, he would've been attempting his season long.And for those of you who think that FG attempt carries no risk, ask Vikings fans what happened when Longwell lined up for a 51-yd FG attempt at the end of the first half of the SF game.

I watched it several times today on DVR too and my opinion lies between you and Calbear. You say he would have been lucky to get back to the line of scrimmage, I disagree. I think he would have picked up 3 to 4 yards unless he dives with his head forward, then maybe 5. However, doing that latter could have been suicide, so let's say 3 to 4.I do think people underestimate the closing speed of those defenders. If Brett Farve starts to redirect his motion on that bad foot, the defense would have closed so fast it would have made your head spin. I heard someone at work say Farve could have ran for 15 yards.....I couldn't talk to him anymore after that. I just said ya you're right, he probably would have stiff armed some people and broke one and went to the house. To me, taking everyone's speed and current abilities into account, he gains 3 to 4 yards on a run, making he kick around 52 or 53 yards. Again, to me the play that cost Minnesota the game was having 12 men in the huddle after a timeout.

 

[Lobary]

After watching the replay, Favre is at the 42 and still angling to the sideline with a LB right in front of him square to him at the 32.

Exactly. Now, imagine the halfway point between those two players.....which guy do you think gets there first, and by how much? It's not the 40 yr old with the barking ankle.

 

[Lobary]

The line of scrimmage was the 38; Favre released the ball at the 41 while he was moving forward and to his right. When he released the ball, the closest downfield defender was at the 31, and moving away from the line of scrimmage. The only defender near the line of scrimmage who could make a play on Favre is Remi Ayodele, who's listed at 318 and that was before he hit the buffet table a few times. It doesn't look like Ayodele had an angle on Favre.If Favre had run, he certainly would have gotten back to the line of scrimmage; he probably could have run for the sideline and gotten inside the 35. The kick still would have been from 50+ yards, but not 55. (I don't know where the 56 number is coming from; the line of scrimmage was right on the 38).

Having watched the replay many times now on dvr, I can confidently state that there is no way Favre would've made inside the 35 yd line and would've been very lucky to make it back to the original line of scrimmage. There were not one but TWO defenders (a DB and an LB) within ten yards of him from where he released the ball, both of them spying on him to make sure he didn't run for it. If he'd run for it, they almost certainly would've closed that distance quickly and kept him within the 37 yd line. That's a 54 yd FG attempt in the most trying of circumstances. I wholeheartedly agree with David Yudkin and have been making the same argument with friends at work all day. Everyone is talking about that interception as if Longwell was in position to hit a chip shot field goal when, realistically, he would've been attempting his season long.And for those of you who think that FG attempt carries no risk, ask Vikings fans what happened when Longwell lined up for a 51-yd FG attempt at the end of the first half of the SF game.

I watched it several times today on DVR too and my opinion lies between you and Calbear. You say he would have been lucky to get back to the line of scrimmage, I disagree. I think he would have picked up 3 to 4 yards unless he dives with his head forward, then maybe 5. However, doing that latter could have been suicide, so let's say 3 to 4.I do think people underestimate the closing speed of those defenders. If Brett Farve starts to redirect his motion on that bad foot, the defense would have closed so fast it would have made your head spin. I heard someone at work say Farve could have ran for 15 yards.....I couldn't talk to him anymore after that. I just said ya you're right, he probably would have stiff armed some people and broke one and went to the house. To me, taking everyone's speed and current abilities into account, he gains 3 to 4 yards on a run, making he kick around 52 or 53 yards. Again, to me the play that cost Minnesota the game was having 12 men in the huddle after a timeout.

Good posting. We can disagree whether or not Favre would've made it beyond the line of scrimmage, but even if he had I think we agree that he wouldn't have made it beyond the 35. That's still a 52 yard kick. I think the blame for all this "he coulda run for it!!" foolishness can be placed at the feet of Troy Aikman because Aikman's comments in real time were horribly off. I don't know what he was watching, but the replay doesn't lie. Favre had no chance of getting "ten or fifteen yards." Big time WTF moment there, Troy.

 

[pinequick]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.

Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

Oh, stop it.

 

[pinequick]

The line of scrimmage was the 38; Favre released the ball at the 41 while he was moving forward and to his right. When he released the ball, the closest downfield defender was at the 31, and moving away from the line of scrimmage. The only defender near the line of scrimmage who could make a play on Favre is Remi Ayodele, who's listed at 318 and that was before he hit the buffet table a few times. It doesn't look like Ayodele had an angle on Favre.If Favre had run, he certainly would have gotten back to the line of scrimmage; he probably could have run for the sideline and gotten inside the 35. The kick still would have been from 50+ yards, but not 55. (I don't know where the 56 number is coming from; the line of scrimmage was right on the 38).

Having watched the replay many times now on dvr, I can confidently state that there is no way Favre would've made inside the 35 yd line and would've been very lucky to make it back to the original line of scrimmage. There were not one but TWO defenders (a DB and an LB) within ten yards of him from where he released the ball, both of them spying on him to make sure he didn't run for it. If he'd run for it, they almost certainly would've closed that distance quickly and kept him within the 37 yd line. That's a 54 yd FG attempt in the most trying of circumstances. I wholeheartedly agree with David Yudkin and have been making the same argument with friends at work all day. Everyone is talking about that interception as if Longwell was in position to hit a chip shot field goal when, realistically, he would've been attempting his season long.And for those of you who think that FG attempt carries no risk, ask Vikings fans what happened when Longwell lined up for a 51-yd FG attempt at the end of the first half of the SF game.

I watched it several times today on DVR too and my opinion lies between you and Calbear. You say he would have been lucky to get back to the line of scrimmage, I disagree. I think he would have picked up 3 to 4 yards unless he dives with his head forward, then maybe 5. However, doing that latter could have been suicide, so let's say 3 to 4.I do think people underestimate the closing speed of those defenders. If Brett Farve starts to redirect his motion on that bad foot, the defense would have closed so fast it would have made your head spin. I heard someone at work say Farve could have ran for 15 yards.....I couldn't talk to him anymore after that. I just said ya you're right, he probably would have stiff armed some people and broke one and went to the house. To me, taking everyone's speed and current abilities into account, he gains 3 to 4 yards on a run, making he kick around 52 or 53 yards. Again, to me the play that cost Minnesota the game was having 12 men in the huddle after a timeout.

Good posting. We can disagree whether or not Favre would've made it beyond the line of scrimmage, but even if he had I think we agree that he wouldn't have made it beyond the 35. That's still a 52 yard kick. I think the blame for all this "he coulda run for it!!" foolishness can be placed at the feet of Troy Aikman because Aikman's comments in real time were horribly off. I don't know what he was watching, but the replay doesn't lie. Favre had no chance of getting "ten or fifteen yards." Big time WTF moment there, Troy.

He makes it to the 35 there--I agree. A 52-yarder, and a chance at the Super Bowl. No gimme, but certainly not as low-probability as a hail mary, or some such.

 

[Lobary]

Fair enough, but the consensus chatter today seems to imply that but for Favre's interception, the Vikings win that game. I don't agree at all because kickers haven't excelled this season with games on the line, and Ryan Longwell (as good as he's been) would've been attempting at best his season-tying long FG.

Long field goal attempts require lower trajectory kicks, increasing the risk of a blocked FG returned for a TD.

Favre's throw was very stupid because it cost them an opportunity to kick the winning FG, but it wasn't determinative in and of itself. If we're gonna point at one play, Berrian's fumble was the play I can't forget.

 

[sho nuff]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

Yes...he could have run.While he was hobbled...it obviously was not too bad as he was rolling out on the play and looked just fine doing so.As for the FG.Tell me which play gives your team a better chance to win...a long FG...or an INT?I will hang up and listen.BTW...very very few have tried pinning this loss on Favre and that INT.

 

[CaptainHook]

he pretty clearly makes it to around the 35 +/- 2 yards.

A 52 yarder longwell probably makes 60% of the time. It's inside a dome its probably closer to 70%.

His career long is highly irrelevant because teams aren't kicking field goals over 50 yards very often for obvious reasons please stop citing this as if its important.

OT Is probably a 50/50 proposition.

At a minimum, Favre's completely ridiculous throw flipped them from 1-(.4*.5) = 80% favorites to a coin flip.

 

[Captain Placeholder]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

Favre was running pretty well rolling out of the pocket. He easily could have gotten enough yards to at least make it a reachable FG attempt for Longwell. Even 4 yards makes it a 52 yarder in a dome. I gotta think Longwell has the leg for that. And if he waits one more half second, he's got Berrian open on the sideline for an 8 or 10 yard gain.

I don't know exactly how severe the sprain was but I do know when I've had a sprained ankle, I could be going one way pretty good once I got my momentum going but stopping and turning direction to gain speed like Farve would have had to do is a different story.Would Farve do it over and run it now regardless of the pain, even if he knew it meant a broken ankle to make the cut? He probably would.......but he didn't. He threw the ball to make a play he wouldn't have had to make if someone after a timeout wasn't the 12th man in the huddle.

You're not going to win this argument against Cowboys fans, folks. They have too much practice defending Romo.

 

[phthalatemagic]

But what you're failing to bring into your argument is that Farve was injured. He had a sprained ankle and just taking off and taking another shot didn't register to the 40 year old.

We all know this. We all also know that he's allegedly the toughest SO out there. So don't tell me he can't tough it out and run for 8 yards.

He thought he could make a play with his arm because he knew he needed yardage to get a realistic shot at a FG.

Yes. This is a common theme for the all time interception king.

The same guy you claim isn't the right QB for the job, which makes no sense. The 12th man in the huddle was absolutely ridiculous and was the play of the game, after a timeout of all things.

If you almost get the job done, are you the right QB for the job?

That penalty was absolutely huge.

Interception was huger.

Either way, good luck finding someone who will ever be tougher and more of a gamer than Brett Farve.

There are people in the league RIGHT NOW who fit that description. And they don't do #### like laying down for Mike Strahan, hold teams hostage, put teams in bad positions with bad throwing decisions, etc.

 

[Mr. Black]

That entire last drive was horrible, IMO Childress was playing for OT. They were in no hurry to run the plays and once they some how crossed the 50 they decided what the hell lets try for a long fg attempt. That was terrible coaching and that last play call was awful. I expect that play to be call for T jackson not B Favre.

 

[Kitrick Taylor]

Not blaming the loss entirely on Favre. The Vikings did their best to fumble the game away throughout. If not for all the earlier turnovers this one could have been a rout.

Having said that, the Vikings had the ball in FG range (Longwell is 8 for 8 over 50 in the last two years) with less than a minute to go in regulation. The Vikings have an offensive meltdown and somehow put 12 guys in the huddle after a timeout. Unbelievable mistake.

Favre, now feels the pressure to make a play to get that FG attempt a bit closer. He rolls right and has a few choices:

1. He can dump a pass down to the WR along the right sideline.

2. He can run.

3. He can throw back across his body to the middle of the field.

Much has been made here about Favre not opting to run the ball due to a banged up ankle, being 40 years old etc. Seems to me John Elway was in much the same position in the 1997 Super Bowl. He chose to run. Its now a play that has become the defining moment in his career.

Favre chose to throw back across his body to the middle of the field. It is the cardinal sin for a QB. While that pick in particular may not be the defining moment of his career, killer season ending picks may be what he is remembered for.

That pick and two others in overtime of playoff games (2003, 2007) have been the last offensive plays for all three of those teams. I'd argue all three of those teams were Super Bowl worthy.

 

[Stealthycat]

I think they should have put Chester in wildcat and let him go ......... why? ADP couldn't fumble if Chester had the ball. Favre can't throw an INT and his was so gimpy he wasn't going to get good yards to matter.

Direct snap to Chester, let me him get what he can, and try the FG

 

[zDragon]

There's a lot of talk this morning about the 12-men in the huddle penalty killing us. IMO they should have been trying to get a lot closer to the end zone as opposed to letting time run off the way they did. 50+ yards it too much to ask for from any kicker.

So is it true the extra guy was a confused FB?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

Yes...he could have run.While he was hobbled...it obviously was not too bad as he was rolling out on the play and looked just fine doing so.As for the FG.Tell me which play gives your team a better chance to win...a long FG...or an INT?I will hang up and listen.BTW...very very few have tried pinning this loss on Favre and that INT.

This is a ridiculous argument, considering you're only accounting for the option that he throws an INT by throwing the ball.You're the same type of person that, had they gone conservative and kicked the FG and missed it, would be sitting here spouting off ridiculous one liners like "which gives your team a better chance to win....throwing the ball with a QB that's only thrown 7 INTs this year....or a missed field goal".You're completely incapable of differentiating outcome with probability.So Favre lost the game throwing across his body. Big freaking deal, he's won plenty of other games doing things that are just as unorthodox. I was a bigtime Favre basher coming into this year, but he proved everyone wrong and the only people still clinging to the Favre hate are people that can't admit when they're wrong and people that are irrationally reactionary.

 

[CalBear]

Watch the reverse angle. There's a LB not far from Favre with an angle on him. He would have closed fast, Favre would have been lucky to get a yard. Honestly I don't understand all the people saying he should have just run, do they just watch one angle and assume that the other 40% of the field around him doesn't exist?

I watched it from the reverse angle, and my analysis stands.
Look at 0:52. There's no one behind him. The only guy close to him on the line is a DL who does not have an angle on him. There are 10 yards between him and the nearest downfield defender. And Berrian is open at the 30.

 

[zDragon]

Watch the reverse angle. There's a LB not far from Favre with an angle on him. He would have closed fast, Favre would have been lucky to get a yard. Honestly I don't understand all the people saying he should have just run, do they just watch one angle and assume that the other 40% of the field around him doesn't exist?

I watched it from the reverse angle, and my analysis stands.

Appears to be a spy 6 yds from the line of scrimmage squared to Favre. Favre is 3 yards from the line of scrimmage when he releases the ball. Favre's going no where on that play and especially not for 10-15 yards.

 

[sho nuff]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

Yes...he could have run.While he was hobbled...it obviously was not too bad as he was rolling out on the play and looked just fine doing so.As for the FG.Tell me which play gives your team a better chance to win...a long FG...or an INT?I will hang up and listen.BTW...very very few have tried pinning this loss on Favre and that INT.

This is a ridiculous argument, considering you're only accounting for the option that he throws an INT by throwing the ball.You're the same type of person that, had they gone conservative and kicked the FG and missed it, would be sitting here spouting off ridiculous one liners like "which gives your team a better chance to win....throwing the ball with a QB that's only thrown 7 INTs this year....or a missed field goal".You're completely incapable of differentiating outcome with probability.So Favre lost the game throwing across his body. Big freaking deal, he's won plenty of other games doing things that are just as unorthodox. I was a bigtime Favre basher coming into this year, but he proved everyone wrong and the only people still clinging to the Favre hate are people that can't admit when they're wrong and people that are irrationally reactionary.

Im accounting for the option that actually happened. The INT.I don't think I will ever claim that the better option is having any QB roll to his right and throw across his body to the middle of the field.Yes...the hindsight is aiding my argument. I know that he threw an INT...I know that he had room to run for a few yards to make it closer.Oh...and I did not say he lost the game.and yes...he has won plenty of games.My argument is not to bash Favre or any hate of him...he played a very good game and had a great season.My argument is against those claiming it was a good option to have him throw to the middle of the field and take a chance rather than run and try a long FG.The statistics of probably outcomes bear out my argument and support me quite well.

 

[sho nuff]

Watch the reverse angle. There's a LB not far from Favre with an angle on him. He would have closed fast, Favre would have been lucky to get a yard. Honestly I don't understand all the people saying he should have just run, do they just watch one angle and assume that the other 40% of the field around him doesn't exist?

I watched it from the reverse angle, and my analysis stands.

I agree he is not going for 10-15 yards. But who is claiming he makes it 10-15 yards?Most were saying around 5 yards.

 

[zDragon]

Watch the reverse angle. There's a LB not far from Favre with an angle on him. He would have closed fast, Favre would have been lucky to get a yard. Honestly I don't understand all the people saying he should have just run, do they just watch one angle and assume that the other 40% of the field around him doesn't exist?

I watched it from the reverse angle, and my analysis stands.

That's what Troy said and some seem to think so. I really don't think he get near 5 yds on that play. The distance separating them leads me to believe Favre gets about 1.5 yards if he's lucky.

 

[David Yudkin]

he pretty clearly makes it to around the 35 +/- 2 yards. A 52 yarder longwell probably makes 60% of the time. It's inside a dome its probably closer to 70%.His career long is highly irrelevant because teams aren't kicking field goals over 50 yards very often for obvious reasons please stop citing this as if its important.OT Is probably a 50/50 proposition. At a minimum, Favre's completely ridiculous throw flipped them from 1-(.4*.5) = 80% favorites to a coin flip.

I still find it curious that some folks think that Longwell had a 70% or greater chance of making a very long FG (no matter what the exact distance would have been). In this post season, there were already 13 missed field goals and kickers were a paltry 20 for 33 (60%), with almost all of those from far closer than the kick Longwell would have had to make. I realize a 1% chance of making a FG is a greater chance than 0% in throwing an interception there, but it's not like Favre was at the 10 yard line and they tried to run one more play.Favre also had only 7 rushing yards on 9 attempts all season. I think it's safe to say that he does not look to scramble and run very often, especially not with a banged up ankle. But Troy suggesting he could have waltzed to 10-15 yards = not happening.

 

[phthalatemagic]

he pretty clearly makes it to around the 35 +/- 2 yards. A 52 yarder longwell probably makes 60% of the time. It's inside a dome its probably closer to 70%.His career long is highly irrelevant because teams aren't kicking field goals over 50 yards very often for obvious reasons please stop citing this as if its important.OT Is probably a 50/50 proposition. At a minimum, Favre's completely ridiculous throw flipped them from 1-(.4*.5) = 80% favorites to a coin flip.

I still find it curious that some folks think that Longwell had a 70% or greater chance of making a very long FG (no matter what the exact distance would have been). In this post season, there were already 13 missed field goals and kickers were a paltry 20 for 33 (60%), with almost all of those from far closer than the kick Longwell would have had to make. I realize a 1% chance of making a FG is a greater chance than 0% in throwing an interception there, but it's not like Favre was at the 10 yard line and they tried to run one more play.

Are those Longwell's numbers? No. So who cares if Nate Kaeding chokes in the playoffs and why are you attributing that to Longwell?

 

[sho nuff]

Watch the reverse angle. There's a LB not far from Favre with an angle on him. He would have closed fast, Favre would have been lucky to get a yard. Honestly I don't understand all the people saying he should have just run, do they just watch one angle and assume that the other 40% of the field around him doesn't exist?

I watched it from the reverse angle, and my analysis stands.

Well if Troy said it...thats enough to bring it up here. Some seem to think so? Who?

As for you don't think he gets 5. You are entitled to your opinion. Not sure many would agree with you.

That LB is there...but he is in coverage with a Viking right behind him. A quick pump fake takes care of him and he easily makes the 35 and probably angled towards the sideline could get to the 33...which would have been about 5 yards from the LOS.

 

[zDragon]

Well if Troy said it...thats enough to bring it up here. Some seem to think so? Who?As for you don't think he gets 5. You are entitled to your opinion. Not sure many would agree with you.That LB is there...but he is in coverage with a Viking right behind him. A quick pump fake takes care of him and he easily makes the 35 and probably angled towards the sideline could get to the 33...which would have been about 5 yards from the LOS.

Go read the threads. Why would I care who agrees with me. I'm stating my opinion and making my case. In your scenario that means Brett covers 8 yards to the LB's 1 yard. The LB is not gaining depth. He will close on Brett as soon he moves toward the line. No way old man Brett makes 5 on that play.

 

[North]

So do people realize that if the Vikings had just gone for the run like everyone now seems to be saying, they would get 3 yards at best making it a 53 yard FG (they were at the 56 yard FG range at the time).

And how many times you yell at the TV when your coach gets conservative and then the FG kicker misses the FG. Just ask Charger fans.

My point - the FG was not a gimme; they could have missed it at least 50% of the time. The Saints were going to push up the middle to stop the run. Rolling Favre out was a great call since it avoids the sack. Now throwing across the body was Favre's fault and he should have known better but things like that happen. Every QB makes dumb picks; Manning and Brady included.

I think the bigger blame should go for the 2 plays earlier when they ran the ball to the outside on 2 slow developing plays instead of running behind Hutch, your best OL.

Just my 2 cents....next time you blame your coach for going conservative (see Herm Edwards, **** Jauron, any of the defensive coaches etc), remember that. Last night and the call by Belichik against the Colts shows there are some coaches out there who "try to win the game .... hello". If the play does not work out, that is fine. Just like in poker, I would rather lose playing aggressive than be a scared beotch and lose being conservative.

I think the bigger blame was that they RAN the ball when they were moving the ball at will down the field, in theory accepting a chance at a 51 yard field goal instead of moving closer. They had 40 seconds and a TO, plenty of time to throw the ball a couple of times. Running the ball there was Childress's wreckless play calling finally catching up to him. He's been making dumb calls all year and I have been saying ALL YEAR that it would catch up to him one of these days, well it did!He had plenty of time to move the ball down the field and get closer, instead of just running the ball and settling for a 51 yarder for the win.

He's a dumb a#s and doesn't deserve the contract extension he got!

 

[sho nuff]

Well if Troy said it...thats enough to bring it up here. Some seem to think so? Who?As for you don't think he gets 5. You are entitled to your opinion. Not sure many would agree with you.That LB is there...but he is in coverage with a Viking right behind him. A quick pump fake takes care of him and he easily makes the 35 and probably angled towards the sideline could get to the 33...which would have been about 5 yards from the LOS.

Go read the threads. Why would I care who agrees with me. I'm stating my opinion and making my case. In your scenario that means Brett covers 8 yards to the LB's 1 yard. The LB is not gaining depth. He will close on Brett as soon he moves toward the line. No way old man Brett makes 5 on that play.

Im my scenario the LB would be covering more than one yard as he is to the inside...Favre is running to the outside...and as I said...a pump fake freezes him pretty quickly.No way he makes 5? Your opinion which does not appear to be supported by the actual facts and what was going on on the field.

 

[Black]

Longwell had told the coaches his range was 53 yards.

 

[Lobary]

Well if Troy said it...thats enough to bring it up here.

Some seem to think so? Who?

As for you don't think he gets 5. You are entitled to your opinion. Not sure many would agree with you.

That LB is there...but he is in coverage with a Viking right behind him. A quick pump fake takes care of him and he easily makes the 35 and probably angled towards the sideline could get to the 33...which would have been about 5 yards from the LOS.

Go read the threads. Why would I care who agrees with me. I'm stating my opinion and making my case.

In your scenario that means Brett covers 8 yards to the LB's 1 yard. The LB is not gaining depth. He will close on Brett as soon he moves toward the line. No way old man Brett makes 5 on that play.

Im my scenario the LB would be covering more than one yard as he is to the inside...Favre is running to the outside...and as I said...a pump fake freezes him pretty quickly.No way he makes 5? Your opinion which does not appear to be supported by the actual facts and what was going on on the field.

No way he makes five yards. The replay that happened after the end of regulation best shows where the closest defenders were to Favre when he threw the football. I don't have a youtube video of it, but this pic shows that Fujita and Greer were waiting for Favre to run beyond the LOS to make the tackle. Fujita is squared up, ready to close in once Favre ran with it. He is only three yards or so from the 35. I highly doubt Favre can run from the six yards from the 41 to the 35 before Fujita can cover three or four yards. Favre had nowhere to run.

 

[Lobary]

Not blaming the loss entirely on Favre. The Vikings did their best to fumble the game away throughout. If not for all the earlier turnovers this one could have been a rout.

Having said that, the Vikings had the ball in FG range (Longwell is 8 for 8 over 50 in the last two years)

Not really.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I agree that the fervor over the INT has been a bit much. If Favre threw the ball away, it would have been 4th and 15 and they would have had to settle for a 56-57 yard field goal attempt. Those saying Favre could have ran for as far as he could get also forget that he was hobbled with an ankle injury from earlier in the half. And he's 40.Oh, and by the way, Ryan Longwell has never made a 56 yard kick before. His longest successful kick was 55 yards in 2007. I'm guessing the chance of Longwell making a 56 yard kick would have been very slim, and that certainly it was not a forgone conclusion like some are suggesting. I have heard some media reports today pinning the Vikings loss solely on the interception, which to me is really stretching the situation quite a bit.

Yes...he could have run.While he was hobbled...it obviously was not too bad as he was rolling out on the play and looked just fine doing so.As for the FG.Tell me which play gives your team a better chance to win...a long FG...or an INT?I will hang up and listen.BTW...very very few have tried pinning this loss on Favre and that INT.

This is a ridiculous argument, considering you're only accounting for the option that he throws an INT by throwing the ball.You're the same type of person that, had they gone conservative and kicked the FG and missed it, would be sitting here spouting off ridiculous one liners like "which gives your team a better chance to win....throwing the ball with a QB that's only thrown 7 INTs this year....or a missed field goal".You're completely incapable of differentiating outcome with probability.So Favre lost the game throwing across his body. Big freaking deal, he's won plenty of other games doing things that are just as unorthodox. I was a bigtime Favre basher coming into this year, but he proved everyone wrong and the only people still clinging to the Favre hate are people that can't admit when they're wrong and people that are irrationally reactionary.

Im accounting for the option that actually happened. The INT.I don't think I will ever claim that the better option is having any QB roll to his right and throw across his body to the middle of the field.Yes...the hindsight is aiding my argument. I know that he threw an INT...I know that he had room to run for a few yards to make it closer.Oh...and I did not say he lost the game.and yes...he has won plenty of games.My argument is not to bash Favre or any hate of him...he played a very good game and had a great season.My argument is against those claiming it was a good option to have him throw to the middle of the field and take a chance rather than run and try a long FG.The statistics of probably outcomes bear out my argument and support me quite well.

So what you're saying there is that it is your belief that the play called in the huddle was "let's have Favre roll to the right and throw back to the middle of the field"?It was pretty clear that that wasn't the design of the play, and that's just what happened after things broke down. Calling a run playl there and attempting a long FG would have brought on approximately 10000000x the hatred as what actually occurred. And I have little doubt that if they had done that and Longwell had missed, you would be on here complaining about how stupid it was to not try picking up some more yards through the air there to set up a more manageable field goal.

 

[sho nuff]

Well if Troy said it...thats enough to bring it up here.

Some seem to think so? Who?

As for you don't think he gets 5. You are entitled to your opinion. Not sure many would agree with you.

That LB is there...but he is in coverage with a Viking right behind him. A quick pump fake takes care of him and he easily makes the 35 and probably angled towards the sideline could get to the 33...which would have been about 5 yards from the LOS.

Go read the threads. Why would I care who agrees with me. I'm stating my opinion and making my case.

In your scenario that means Brett covers 8 yards to the LB's 1 yard. The LB is not gaining depth. He will close on Brett as soon he moves toward the line. No way old man Brett makes 5 on that play.

Im my scenario the LB would be covering more than one yard as he is to the inside...Favre is running to the outside...and as I said...a pump fake freezes him pretty quickly.No way he makes 5? Your opinion which does not appear to be supported by the actual facts and what was going on on the field.

No way he makes five yards. The replay that happened after the end of regulation best shows where the closest defenders were to Favre when he threw the football. I don't have a youtube video of it, but this pic shows that Fujita and Greer were waiting for Favre to run beyond the LOS to make the tackle. Fujita is squared up, ready to close in once Favre ran with it. He is only three yards or so from the 35. I highly doubt Favre can run from the six yards from the 41 to the 35 before Fujita can cover three or four yards. Favre had nowhere to run.

Fujita is in coverage...and as I said...a pump fake freezes him. Greer has a WR right near him (another option to throw to perhaps too?) to help block to clear the way...and Greer is moving backwards.He had plenty of room to all that watch the video.

And again...Favre even agrees he should have just run with it...why don't you all just take his word for it and agree with the guy?

It was a bad decision...its ok to admit Favre made a bad decision.

 

[sho nuff]

So what you're saying there is that it is your belief that the play called in the huddle was "let's have Favre roll to the right and throw back to the middle of the field"?It was pretty clear that that wasn't the design of the play, and that's just what happened after things broke down. Calling a run playl there and attempting a long FG would have brought on approximately 10000000x the hatred as what actually occurred. And I have little doubt that if they had done that and Longwell had missed, you would be on here complaining about how stupid it was to not try picking up some more yards through the air there to set up a more manageable field goal.

If what I was saying was your little quote there...I would have said it. Don't use that type of spin...pretty weak.What I am saying is...of all of the options Favre had at the time...he chose the poorest one.Im not saying call a run. Im not saying don't call a pass.Im saying a QB that has been in the league that long should know not to throw the ball across his body to the middle of the field.There is no excuse for it...so why do you people continue to make excuses and act that a long FG was somehow a worse option than a terrible decision that Favre made?