Did Norv Turner make the right decision (1 Viewer)

[Chase Stuart]

With 1:30 remaining, San Diego faced 4th and two. They were down by 3 points, facing the Colts at home. What should they have done?

 

[geneyus]

His real mistake was calling the TO too soon.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

He made the right decision to kick the FG.

 

[Archie Bunker]

There are a lot of things to blame Norv for. Attempting the FG is not one of them.

 

[sho nuff]

His real mistake was calling the TO too soon.

I was wondering what they were thinking.And they did not wait long to send Kaeding out there.They had to know they were kicking...so you have to milk the clock there.Don't give Peyton 1:30 and a timeout of his own to play with only needing a FG.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

deciding to kick not a mistake....

calling the TO too soon....very big mistake

had to kick it....if they go for it and don't get it....he is second guessed all week

eta: and I think that is why you saw him so pissed off and dropping f bombs right after he called the time out....partly because they didn't make it, but partly because as soon as he called it, he realized he should have waited until the clock ran down more...you could almost see him look back up at the clock/play clock and go "oh ####, what did I just do?"

 

[parrot]

I thought it was a mistake to kick for a tie. Even if you survive Manning and Vinatieri in the clutch you still probably have only a 50/50 chance in overtime. I think they should have gone for the win right there.

 

[Bills_Fan11]

Making the 46 yarder is a little more likely than converting the 2 yards, though obv. the best you can do with a FG is go to OT where as that's the worst you can do (within reason) with a 1st down.

Going for it is easily correct imo going by pure math/probability, though certainly very few coaches would do it because they don't get blamed for the loss when they take the conservative route, or at least not to the same extent had they gone for it and not made it.

 

[KevT]

Going for it was the correct decision once the timeout was called too early. Manning only needs to get into FG position with 1:30 and a timeout. Plenty of time for him and Vinateri, to win the game.

 

[SuperJohn96]

I agree the big mistake was calling the T.O.

But did a player on the field call the T.O.?

I only ask because on NFL Sirius this a.m., they mentioned that Norv was livid on the sidelines when the T.O. was called, and I assumed it was because he didn't want it then.

 

[parrot]

Norv is supposed to be an offensive genius. He's playing a bottom quarter rush defense. He has LT and Sproles at his disposal, one of the best pass-catching tight-ends in the game, a 300 lb blocking tight-end, two very big receivers, and a third very strong possession receiver, but he doesn't have a play where he feels he has a pretty good chance of getting two yards?

The field goal was a complete CYA move on his part IMO.

 

[Banger]

You go for the win there. Going for the tie you give the best current QB in the league a ton of time to pick apart one of the worst pass defenses in the league. Even if he fails in regulation you still may have to hold him off again in OT.

Going for the FG was the safe play but his team needed a win and some confidence.

 

[parrot]

You go for the win there. Going for the tie you give the best current QB in the league a ton of time to pick apart one of the worst pass defenses in the league. Even if he fails in regulation you still may have to hold him off again in OT. Going for the FG was the safe play but his team needed a win and some confidence.

Peyton Manning against the statistically WORST pass D in the league, and Adam V waiting in the wings when all they need is a field goal to win.

 

[Black]

It seemed like they were playing for the FG, when they should have played for the TD.

Either run the ball, run out the clock and be close enough for a last second FG OR go for the friggin TD. He didn't do either.

The wishy-washy play calling is killing them.

 

[Banger]

Seriously, giving the ball back to Manning with 1:30 on the clock against that defense I thought he had a 60%+ chance of winning it in regulation, then if he fails in regulation you've got a 50/50 shot in OT. So do you risk a risk a long 46 yard FG to at best give you a 50% shot in OT or put some faith in your team and have them pick up a yard on 4th down. It's not as if Indy has some stout defense.

At a time like that I think of what Bill Belicheck would do and I have absolutely no doubt that he goes for it 10 times out of 10. I'm not a big fan of his but he plays to win while Norv plays it safe.

You also have to take into account the pivotal nature of this game to the teams season and their confidence level. They've played poorly and had some tough breaks go against them this season so in times like that you want to control your own destiny IMO. You want to make the play, win the game and give your team some confidence, especially knowing Denver lost earlier in the day. You don't want to give the ball back to the best clutch QB in the game (save Brady) with that much time on the clock, that's insane. Norv just doesn't have guts IMO and is a poor coach.

Against a lot of other opponents on other days the FG is the right play but not yesterday vs. Manning.

 

[Lash]

at 4-6 with denver having lost you HAVE to win that game

his BEST chance of winning that game was going for the first down

Indy had fourth and inches with 16 seconds left and went for it because it was their best chance of winning the game

anything else is playing for a 50/50 OT coin flip

 

[Banger]

at 4-6 with denver having lost you HAVE to win that gamehis BEST chance of winning that game was going for the first downIndy had fourth and inches with 16 seconds left and went for it because it was their best chance of winning the gameanything else is playing for a 50/50 OT coin flip

and how did Indy go for it? Did they go for a one yard plunge? No, they went 15 or so yards down the field to win the game. I just get very frustrated with Norv and his constant deer in the headlights look.

 

[hitman2]

There was no reason to believe that they would have got the 2 yards (or the TD after that). None.

LT was running tentative (which is why they throw it on the goalline now) and I wouldn't trust Rivers to get it to any of the receivers.

Manning to his guys, yes, but not Rivers.

I agree with the comments that the Timeout was called too quickly and they had to make the kick to stay alive.

If he went for the 2 yards and failed, he'd be questioned even worse than now IMO.

 

[Da Guru]

He made the right decision to kick the FG.

Norv was in a Catch 22 situation. I waa thinking the same thing at the time. If the Chargers kick now they will leave Manning and the Colts too much time to get in position to win the game.If they go for it and do not make it Norv would have been roasted.

 

[parrot]

Indy had fourth and inches with 16 seconds left and went for it because it was their best chance of winning the game

Midfield, 25 seconds on the clock, and SD still holding two timeouts. The "smart" play was to punt there, but Indy was actually trying to win the game.

 

[Banger]

He made the right decision to kick the FG.

Norv was in a Catch 22 situation. I waa thinking the same thing at the time. If the Chargers kick now they will leave Manning and the Colts too much time to get in position to win the game.If they go for it and do not make it Norv would have been roasted.

their team needed a win and some confidence. Yes, it was a tough situation but you have a team that had SB aspirations that's essentially on life support at this time. You think he'll be here next year if this team doesn't make the playoffs in this division? If they don't make the playoffs he's gone and this was a pivotal game in their season and he chickened out. Play calling like this is why Marty isn't here anymore.

 

[Banger]

There was no reason to believe that they would have got the 2 yards (or the TD after that). None. LT was running tentative (which is why they throw it on the goalline now) and I wouldn't trust Rivers to get it to any of the receivers. Manning to his guys, yes, but not Rivers. I agree with the comments that the Timeout was called too quickly and they had to make the kick to stay alive. If he went for the 2 yards and failed, he'd be questioned even worse than now IMO.

I think there's a better chance of them getting two yards then they had kicking a 46 yard FG AND stopping Manning with 1:30 on the clock and a timeout AND getting the ball in OT and scoring first.

 

[Air Coryell]

I agree the big mistake was calling the T.O.But did a player on the field call the T.O.?I only ask because on NFL Sirius this a.m., they mentioned that Norv was livid on the sidelines when the T.O. was called, and I assumed it was because he didn't want it then.

In his post game Norv said he called the TO, he was livid at himself for calling the time out. THe frustrating part is that if he would have waited 5 seconds and gotten a better look at the spot he would have known. Even if its 4th and inches you dont need to take the timeout immediately.The team has found ever more creative ways to lose games this year.

 

[Urinal Mint]

Norv played it safe, and it'll cost him his job. You don't leave Peyton Manning 90 seconds to go 40 yards. You call the 4th down play and roll the dice for the win. You have to try to kill the clock in that situation.

Going for it on 4th and failing, or kicking the FG... either will create a 3-point loss.

 

[SuperJohn96]

I agree the big mistake was calling the T.O.

But did a player on the field call the T.O.?

I only ask because on NFL Sirius this a.m., they mentioned that Norv was livid on the sidelines when the T.O. was called, and I assumed it was because he didn't want it then.

In his post game Norv said he called the TO, he was livid at himself for calling the time out. THe frustrating part is that if he would have waited 5 seconds and gotten a better look at the spot he would have known. Even if its 4th and inches you dont need to take the timeout immediately.The team has found ever more creative ways to lose games this year.

Ah I see...Now this begs the question, can't they (SD) ask for a measurement to buy some time to make the right decision?

I forget if they did measure...

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

I don't understand the logic some of you guys are using. It wasn't a choice between kicking a FG and and going for a TD. It was a choice between kicking a FG and converting a 4th down at the 28.

Kicking the FG was absolutely the right choice. It was the TO that killed them.

 

[cvnpoka]

I don't understand the logic some of you guys are using. It wasn't a choice between kicking a FG and and going for a TD. It was a choice between kicking a FG and converting a 4th down at the 28. Kicking the FG was absolutely the right choice. It was the TO that killed them.

how much time would have run off if they used the timeout at the last possible second? down to 50? i think i like the fg there. still pretty close.anyway, since they did botch the timing, i think going for it is the clear choice with 90s left.you need to consider: 1. (chance of making the fg) times (chance of stopping manning with 90s) times (chance of winning in ot (assume 50/50)) versus2. (chance of getting the first down) times (chance of kicking shorter fg) times (winning in ot) plus (chance of getting first down) times (chance of td)someone else can plug in the numbers but i would guess the second option is better.

 

[Air Coryell]

I agree the big mistake was calling the T.O.

But did a player on the field call the T.O.?

I only ask because on NFL Sirius this a.m., they mentioned that Norv was livid on the sidelines when the T.O. was called, and I assumed it was because he didn't want it then.

In his post game Norv said he called the TO, he was livid at himself for calling the time out. THe frustrating part is that if he would have waited 5 seconds and gotten a better look at the spot he would have known. Even if its 4th and inches you dont need to take the timeout immediately.The team has found ever more creative ways to lose games this year.

Ah I see...Now this begs the question, can't they (SD) ask for a measurement to buy some time to make the right decision?

I forget if they did measure...

There was no need to measure, it was 2+ yards away from a first down. I dont think the refs will stop to measure unless its reasonably close. Norv didnt keep his composure and it gave Manning another chance.

 

[parrot]

I don't understand the logic some of you guys are using. It wasn't a choice between kicking a FG and and going for a TD. It was a choice between kicking a FG and converting a 4th down at the 28. Kicking the FG was absolutely the right choice. It was the TO that killed them.

If you convert the fourth down, you can pretty much still kick the figgie if necessary, but you can also try for the TD first and leave the Colts no time to bite you in the ###.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Norv's mistake was calling the TO. Kicking the FG was the right move. 4 and 2 is no gimmie, especially the way the Chargers have been running the ball.

You tie the game and show some confidence in your defense. A defense that had done a pretty good job the entire night, especially considering a couple of the PI calls that went against them.

If Jammer doesn't run into the ref and bats down Mannings 4th down pass to Harrison, the Bolts take over at mid field with enough time to win the game.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

does anyone know how much more time he could have let run off....in my mind it was quite a bit because I the first thing I thought was "why are you calling it so early-way too much time left".....

 

[TommyGilmore]

His real mistake was calling the TO too soon.

As someone mentioned in the game thread, once you call that timeout then you have no choice but to go for it. Otherwise you will leave Manning too much time on the clock.

 

[parrot]

does anyone know how much more time he could have let run off....in my mind it was quite a bit because I the first thing I thought was "why are you calling it so early-way too much time left".....

I would think Dungy would use his last timeout if Norv doesn't call one. Yes? No? Maybe?

 

[Tau837]

at 4-6 with denver having lost you HAVE to win that gamehis BEST chance of winning that game was going for the first downIndy had fourth and inches with 16 seconds left and went for it because it was their best chance of winning the gameanything else is playing for a 50/50 OT coin flip

It's not your primary point here, but Indy going for it when they did was not comparable. If they didn't convert, that alone would not cause them to lose the game, as it would have for San Diego. Again, I'm not saying they shouldn't have gone for it, just that your comparison is invalid IMO.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Making the 46 yarder is a little more likely than converting the 2 yards, though obv. the best you can do with a FG is go to OT where as that's the worst you can do (within reason) with a 1st down. Going for it is easily correct imo going by pure math/probability, though certainly very few coaches would do it because they don't get blamed for the loss when they take the conservative route, or at least not to the same extent had they gone for it and not made it.

By kicking the FG, you remove yourself from direct responsibility. Miss the FG, it's the kickers fault. Make the FG and Indy drives to win it anyway? It's your defenses fault. I'd say vs. an offense like Indy, the statistically correct play is go for it.

 

[JKL]

I'm stunned that the voting is so lopsided. Even setting aside the specifics of the two teams and the quarterback, the correct play is pretty solidly to go for it here, given a) the distance to first, b) the distance for a fg, and c) the time remaining. Then you add in the quarterback on the other side, the offense vs defense matchups, etc., and the choice should have been even stronger.

Someone above said the choice wasn't between a FG and a TD, it was between a FG and a first down. True, but the choice wasn't between just any field goal, it was a 47 yarder, and not just any fourth down attempt, but one between 1.5 and 2 yards. The actual success rates for those two things aren't all that different, but the payoffs are vastly different, in terms of both giving yourself a chance of winning outright, giving a shorter field goal if necessary, and leaving no time in regulation. A FG attempt down 3 with 1:30 left made SD a pretty strong underdog to win the game.

Here's my quick, off the top of my head rough estimate:

KICK THE FG

Missed FG (30%)=lose game

Made FG (70%)= tie game, kickoff

Then,

Colts score at end of regulation (25% of remaining 70% = 17.5%) = lose game

Then,

Colts win in overtime (50% of remaining 52.5% = 26.25%) = lose game

Chargers win in overtime (50% of remaining 52.5% = 26.25%) = win game

==================================================

Colts = 73.25%

Chargers = 26.25%

I'll lower that because of other small factors I didn't account (Chargers missing fg but getting ball back with a little time left and tying or winning game, int return for td by SD in regulation), but I'll guess the Colts were around a 70% favorite once SD decided to kick.

GO FOR IT

Fail on Downs (42%) = lose game

Convert first, go on to score TD (40% of remaining 58%= 23.2%) = win game

Convert first, go on to kick FG (52% of remaining 58% = 30.2%) = tie game, overtime

Convert first, but miss FG or turnover (8% of remaining 58% = 4.6%) = lose game

Colts win in overtime (50% of remaining 30.2% = 15.1%) = lose game

Chargers win in overtime (50% of remaining 30.2% = 15.1%) = win game

===================================================

Colts = 61.7%

Chargers = 38.3%

Again, other rarer things could happen, but these should move in the same direction mostly, with the Chargers with 2 more timeouts still having a slim chance of scoring even if failing or missing a field goal if they got the ball back after a punt with about 30 seconds left. I'll say the Colts were around a 60% favorite if SD decided to go for it.

My estimate is that Turner reduced San Diego's chance of winning by 10% by deciding to kick the field goal. That may sound like a small number, but it is fairly huge.

Also, the timeout call was also an error, but I will disagree that it was the bigger error. The chances of winning if you call timeout then go for it are still significantly higher than not calling timeout and then kicking a non-sure thing FG that may only send you to OT, best case.

You Play to Win the Game.

 

[theplayer11]

A little off topic, but I've noticed the good coaches never call a time out when deciding to go for it or not...they have already thought it out in advance. 3rd down and whatever, you have to be thinking what to do if it ends up 4th and 1, 4th and 2, ect. You shouldn't have to waste a time out to decide.

 

[cvnpoka]

I'm stunned that the voting is so lopsided. Even setting aside the specifics of the two teams and the quarterback, the correct play is pretty solidly to go for it here, given a) the distance to first, b) the distance for a fg, and c) the time remaining. Then you add in the quarterback on the other side, the offense vs defense matchups, etc., and the choice should have been even stronger.Someone above said the choice wasn't between a FG and a TD, it was between a FG and a first down. True, but the choice wasn't between just any field goal, it was a 47 yarder, and not just any fourth down attempt, but one between 1.5 and 2 yards. The actual success rates for those two things aren't all that different, but the payoffs are vastly different, in terms of both giving yourself a chance of winning outright, giving a shorter field goal if necessary, and leaving no time in regulation. A FG attempt down 3 with 1:30 left made SD a pretty strong underdog to win the game.Here's my quick, off the top of my head rough estimate:KICK THE FGMissed FG (30%)=lose gameMade FG (70%)= tie game, kickoffThen, Colts score at end of regulation (25% of remaining 70% = 17.5%) = lose gameThen,Colts win in overtime (50% of remaining 52.5% = 26.25%) = lose gameChargers win in overtime (50% of remaining 52.5% = 26.25%) = win game==================================================Colts = 73.25%Chargers = 26.25%I'll lower that because of other small factors I didn't account (Chargers missing fg but getting ball back with a little time left and tying or winning game, int return for td by SD in regulation), but I'll guess the Colts were around a 70% favorite once SD decided to kick.GO FOR ITFail on Downs (42%) = lose gameConvert first, go on to score TD (40% of remaining 58%= 23.2%) = win gameConvert first, go on to kick FG (52% of remaining 58% = 30.2%) = tie game, overtimeConvert first, but miss FG or turnover (8% of remaining 58% = 4.6%) = lose gameColts win in overtime (50% of remaining 30.2% = 15.1%) = lose gameChargers win in overtime (50% of remaining 30.2% = 15.1%) = win game===================================================Colts = 61.7%Chargers = 38.3%Again, other rarer things could happen, but these should move in the same direction mostly, with the Chargers with 2 more timeouts still having a slim chance of scoring even if failing or missing a field goal if they got the ball back after a punt with about 30 seconds left. I'll say the Colts were around a 60% favorite if SD decided to go for it.My estimate is that Turner reduced San Diego's chance of winning by 10% by deciding to kick the field goal. That may sound like a small number, but it is fairly huge.Also, the timeout call was also an error, but I will disagree that it was the bigger error. The chances of winning if you call timeout then go for it are still significantly higher than not calling timeout and then kicking a non-sure thing FG that may only send you to OT, best case.You Play to Win the Game.

this is a great approach and good analysis. thank you.i disagree on some of your numbers tho. i think, given kaedings career, he is decently greater than 70% to make from there. i would say at least 80. i would also say the colts are much better than 25% to score with 1:30. i was thinking 50-60% but im not so sure.

 

[CalBear]

i disagree on some of your numbers tho. i think, given kaedings career, he is decently greater than 70% to make from there. i would say at least 80. i would also say the colts are much better than 25% to score with 1:30. i was thinking 50-60% but im not so sure.

They wound up with a 51-yard field goal attempt. Vinatieri is 10/21 in his career on kicks over 50 yards, so even after converting a fourth down (and getting lucky the refs screwed up, essentially giving Indy a free timeout), they didn't get any better than a 50/50 shot.

 

[TommyGilmore]

this is a great approach and good analysis. thank you.i disagree on some of your numbers tho. i think, given kaedings career, he is decently greater than 70% to make from there. i would say at least 80. i would also say the colts are much better than 25% to score with 1:30. i was thinking 50-60% but im not so sure.

Kaeding career stats: 73% from 40-49 yards, 63% from 50+.

KICK THE FGMissed FG (30%)=lose game

With 2 timeouts, there was still a possibility for San Diego to get the ball back:1:30 = 1st down (San Diego takes timeout #2)1:25 = 2nd down (San Diego takes timeout #3)1:20 = 3rd down (clock runs down ~40 seconds):40 = Indy punts

 

[JKL]

I'm stunned that the voting is so lopsided. Even setting aside the specifics of the two teams and the quarterback, the correct play is pretty solidly to go for it here, given a) the distance to first, b) the distance for a fg, and c) the time remaining. Then you add in the quarterback on the other side, the offense vs defense matchups, etc., and the choice should have been even stronger.Someone above said the choice wasn't between a FG and a TD, it was between a FG and a first down. True, but the choice wasn't between just any field goal, it was a 47 yarder, and not just any fourth down attempt, but one between 1.5 and 2 yards. The actual success rates for those two things aren't all that different, but the payoffs are vastly different, in terms of both giving yourself a chance of winning outright, giving a shorter field goal if necessary, and leaving no time in regulation. A FG attempt down 3 with 1:30 left made SD a pretty strong underdog to win the game.Here's my quick, off the top of my head rough estimate:KICK THE FGMissed FG (30%)=lose gameMade FG (70%)= tie game, kickoffThen, Colts score at end of regulation (25% of remaining 70% = 17.5%) = lose gameThen,Colts win in overtime (50% of remaining 52.5% = 26.25%) = lose gameChargers win in overtime (50% of remaining 52.5% = 26.25%) = win game==================================================Colts = 73.25%Chargers = 26.25%I'll lower that because of other small factors I didn't account (Chargers missing fg but getting ball back with a little time left and tying or winning game, int return for td by SD in regulation), but I'll guess the Colts were around a 70% favorite once SD decided to kick.GO FOR ITFail on Downs (42%) = lose gameConvert first, go on to score TD (40% of remaining 58%= 23.2%) = win gameConvert first, go on to kick FG (52% of remaining 58% = 30.2%) = tie game, overtimeConvert first, but miss FG or turnover (8% of remaining 58% = 4.6%) = lose gameColts win in overtime (50% of remaining 30.2% = 15.1%) = lose gameChargers win in overtime (50% of remaining 30.2% = 15.1%) = win game===================================================Colts = 61.7%Chargers = 38.3%Again, other rarer things could happen, but these should move in the same direction mostly, with the Chargers with 2 more timeouts still having a slim chance of scoring even if failing or missing a field goal if they got the ball back after a punt with about 30 seconds left. I'll say the Colts were around a 60% favorite if SD decided to go for it.My estimate is that Turner reduced San Diego's chance of winning by 10% by deciding to kick the field goal. That may sound like a small number, but it is fairly huge.Also, the timeout call was also an error, but I will disagree that it was the bigger error. The chances of winning if you call timeout then go for it are still significantly higher than not calling timeout and then kicking a non-sure thing FG that may only send you to OT, best case.You Play to Win the Game.

this is a great approach and good analysis. thank you.i disagree on some of your numbers tho. i think, given kaedings career, he is decently greater than 70% to make from there. i would say at least 80. i would also say the colts are much better than 25% to score with 1:30. i was thinking 50-60% but im not so sure.

I just looked up Kaeding on nfl.com and prior to that kick he was 29 of 40 for his career between 40-49 yards, and 5 of 8 for 50+ yard kicks. Considering 47 yards is toward the longer end of the 40-49 range, my estimate may have actually been generous. He is however 95% inside of 40 for his career, so going for it, succeeding, and not getting a TD would have made a later tying FG almost a sure thing, and I might be overestimating the chance of failure there.As to the Colts estimate of scoring, remember that Vinatieri is not automatic from beyond 40 either. That estimate includes the chance the Colts gain more than 40 yards after the kickoff then miss a field goal to send it to overtime. You may be right though, I intentionally was conservative with that estimate and the point still stands.

 

[cvnpoka]

ya, 80 is too high. not sure what i was thinking.

but i still think its greater than 70 mainly bc the weather conditions were fine.

 

[David Yudkin]

The other factor that is getting lost here is that even if SD makes the first down, they could still turn the ball over and come away with no points and lose. The real issue was the penalty that made them need 15 yards instead of 10. That coupled with the underaneath throw to Manumaleuna put them in the position to have to decide what to do. Obviously at that point they needed to do something, and I thought they would have lined up quickly as if to go for it to try to draw IND offsides and then call timeout at the last second and kick the FG.

 

[Tau837]

The other factor that is getting lost here is that even if SD makes the first down, they could still turn the ball over and come away with no points and lose. The real issue was the penalty that made them need 15 yards instead of 10. That coupled with the underaneath throw to Manumaleuna put them in the position to have to decide what to do. Obviously at that point they needed to do something, and I thought they would have lined up quickly as if to go for it to try to draw IND offsides and then call timeout at the last second and kick the FG.

And Tomlinson's drop also hurt big time. That would have reduced what they needed on third down from 15 yards to 8 yards or so.

 

[tommyGunZ]

GO FOR ITFail on Downs (42%) = lose game

Where did you get this number?

 

[Bills_Fan11]

I don't understand the logic some of you guys are using. It wasn't a choice between kicking a FG and and going for a TD. It was a choice between kicking a FG and converting a 4th down at the 28. Kicking the FG was absolutely the right choice. It was the TO that killed them.

If you convert the fourth down, you can pretty much still kick the figgie if necessary, but you can also try for the TD first and leave the Colts no time to bite you in the ###.

You can also attempt an easier FG with less time for the Colts.