Mike McCarthy make the right call going for it (1 Viewer)

[Werewolf Moderator Fan]

I think he did. I specifically want to hear from the people who think you shouldn't go for it when one yard is worth 6 points, but you should go for it later when two yards are only worth 2 points.

Any analysis that relies on how the score ended up in the game will be ignored.

BTW this is almost an identical situation to the decision Cowher screwed up in the 2004 Conference Championship. Down 14 with 13:32 left to go, he decides to kick a FG instead of going for it 4th and goal from the Pats 2.

 

[sho nuff]

Well...they had 2 other chances to get in for the one...but failed...why think the 3rd try will make it?

If you are going to do it...run it on third or sneak Rodgers...but not 2 straight throws.

I thought they should take the points there. Score would have been nice...but if you can't get the yard in 2 tries...why is the 3rd any better?

 

[Werewolf Moderator Fan]

Well...they had 2 other chances to get in for the one...but failed...why think the 3rd try will make it?If you are going to do it...run it on third or sneak Rodgers...but not 2 straight throws.I thought they should take the points there. Score would have been nice...but if you can't get the yard in 2 tries...why is the 3rd any better?

They are going to have to try a 3rd time on the 2 point conversion later. If they failed two times and kicked a field goal, do they just not go for the 2 point conversion and kick the XP since they already failed earlier?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

"It was a shootout"

 

[sho nuff]

Well...they had 2 other chances to get in for the one...but failed...why think the 3rd try will make it?If you are going to do it...run it on third or sneak Rodgers...but not 2 straight throws.I thought they should take the points there. Score would have been nice...but if you can't get the yard in 2 tries...why is the 3rd any better?

They are going to have to try a 3rd time on the 2 point conversion later. If they failed two times and kicked a field goal, do they just not go for the 2 point conversion and kick the XP since they already failed earlier?

Yes...because that is the same. 2 point conversion is because of the math on needing 16 points later.Though...had they kicked the FG...the would not have been behind by 16 would they?

 

[The Comedian]

Well...they had 2 other chances to get in for the one...but failed...why think the 3rd try will make it?

What?

 

[sho nuff]

Well...they had 2 other chances to get in for the one...but failed...why think the 3rd try will make it?

What?

They had the ball 2nd and goal at the one. Failed on 2nd down. Failed on 3rd down.Now its 4 down...the third try from the one.

 

[The Comedian]

Well...they had 2 other chances to get in for the one...but failed...why think the 3rd try will make it?

What?

They had the ball 2nd and goal at the one. Failed on 2nd down. Failed on 3rd down.Now its 4 down...the third try from the one.

Yeah, I get what happened. It's your "thinking" that I'm expressing shock about - suggesting that if something can't be done in 2 tries, it's foolish to think it could be done in 3. I'm guessing you're just a bitter Packer fan this morning, and I guess I don't blame you..but seriously.

 

[rick6668]

Well...they had 2 other chances to get in for the one...but failed...why think the 3rd try will make it?If you are going to do it...run it on third or sneak Rodgers...but not 2 straight throws.I thought they should take the points there. Score would have been nice...but if you can't get the yard in 2 tries...why is the 3rd any better?

They are going to have to try a 3rd time on the 2 point conversion later. If they failed two times and kicked a field goal, do they just not go for the 2 point conversion and kick the XP since they already failed earlier?

Yes...because that is the same. 2 point conversion is because of the math on needing 16 points later.Though...had they kicked the FG...the would not have been behind by 16 would they?

You're correct. They would have been down by 11. Needing a FG + TD and 2 point conversion to tie... Oh right, they would need a 2 point conversion either way.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I'm curious to see how long it takes for there to be a poll to go for it on 4th and 1 or kick the field goal, and the right answer is to kick the field goal.

I suspect it will be awhile.

 

[Stinger Ray]

From JSOnline...McCarthy's comments on that play.

On whether he considered kicking a field goal on 4th and 1: "No, I play to win. I thought it was a good play. The third down call bothers me more than anything. They're in a goal-line defense and we are in a goal-line offense and we are in a play we call "tempo play." The ball was held up by the referee and I didn't have time to change the play. I liked the fourth down call. I wish I could have the third down call back."

 

[sho nuff]

Well...they had 2 other chances to get in for the one...but failed...why think the 3rd try will make it?

What?

They had the ball 2nd and goal at the one. Failed on 2nd down. Failed on 3rd down.Now its 4 down...the third try from the one.

Yeah, I get what happened. It's your "thinking" that I'm expressing shock about - suggesting that if something can't be done in 2 tries, it's foolish to think it could be done in 3. I'm guessing you're just a bitter Packer fan this morning, and I guess I don't blame you..but seriously.

Not bitter. They lost.But the point remains...take the point IMO. I just did not like the calls down there.

 

[sho nuff]

Well...they had 2 other chances to get in for the one...but failed...why think the 3rd try will make it?If you are going to do it...run it on third or sneak Rodgers...but not 2 straight throws.I thought they should take the points there. Score would have been nice...but if you can't get the yard in 2 tries...why is the 3rd any better?

They are going to have to try a 3rd time on the 2 point conversion later. If they failed two times and kicked a field goal, do they just not go for the 2 point conversion and kick the XP since they already failed earlier?

Yes...because that is the same. 2 point conversion is because of the math on needing 16 points later.Though...had they kicked the FG...the would not have been behind by 16 would they?

You're correct. They would have been down by 11. Needing a FG + TD and 2 point conversion to tie... Oh right, they would need a 2 point conversion either way.

Except then they gave up the safety putting that in this scenario would have put them down by 13.

 

[sho nuff]

From JSOnline...McCarthy's comments on that play.On whether he considered kicking a field goal on 4th and 1: "No, I play to win. I thought it was a good play. The third down call bothers me more than anything. They're in a goal-line defense and we are in a goal-line offense and we are in a play we call "tempo play." The ball was held up by the referee and I didn't have time to change the play. I liked the fourth down call. I wish I could have the third down call back."

I can agree there on not liking the 3rd down play at all. If you are going to go for it on 4th...run it on 3rd IMO.Again...just me and I disliked that call worse than the 4th down call.

 

[DoubleG]

I'm curious to see how long it takes for there to be a poll to go for it on 4th and 1 or kick the field goal, and the right answer is to kick the field goal.I suspect it will be awhile.

When you're down < 3 with less than 10 seconds to go. Then we can have a thread about whether or not the filed goal was good.

 

[GreenNGold]

It was right to go for it but he should have given the ball to Grant on 2nd, 3rd, and then (if needed) on 4th down. His play calling is atrocious. MM proves yet again he is a terrible coach.

 

[Werewolf Moderator Fan]

62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call. My faith in the SP is restored. Used to be a lot of arguing about this back in the day.

 

[Hov34]

Capt. Jean Luc Picard

 

[benbadman]

play to win the game IMO. if you are down 14, you need 15 points to win. take the field goal when there are more than say 10 minutes left in the game. then you are down 11.. 2 TDs wins it, or heck even 1 FG + 1 TD + 2 points ties it.

 

[sho nuff]

62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call. My faith in the SP is restored. Used to be a lot of arguing about this back in the day.

Umm...way to skew that.Its 19 to 17 in favor of yes.51% or so yes 45% or so no.Why just limit the nos to "absolutely" there?

 

[Werewolf Moderator Fan]

62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call. My faith in the SP is restored. Used to be a lot of arguing about this back in the day.

Umm...way to skew that.

What?

 

[ravnzfan]

62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call. My faith in the SP is restored. Used to be a lot of arguing about this back in the day.

and the "crowd mentality" is wrong again....there was waayyyy too much time to walk away from the 3 points...a FG there makes it 28-17, then when they do score the TD and kick the PAT, 28-24 (was 28-20 @that point)...

the saftey pushes it to 30-24

the late FG puts them @30-27

at this point a long FG would have tied the score, rather than need a TD when it was 30-23

I see coaches do this too often, when clearly the move was to kick the near lock 20 yd'er

and BTW...the question as posed is totally flawed....you are asking us to give a judgement on a play where time and score are essential to the decision made on the field, then tell us "arguement refering to the final score" will be ignored

following that logic, never go for the FG as the 6+1 for the TD (if made) is always better than the 3

 

[Werewolf Moderator Fan]

62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call. My faith in the SP is restored. Used to be a lot of arguing about this back in the day.

and the "crowd mentality" is wrong again....there was waayyyy too much time to walk away from the 3 points...a FG there makes it 28-17, then when they do score the TD and kick the PAT, 28-24 (was 28-20 @that point)...the saftey pushes it to 30-24the late FG puts them @30-27at this point a long FG would have tied the score, rather than need a TD when it was 30-23I see coaches do this too often, when clearly the move was to kick the near lock 20 yd'er

Took a while, but here's 1.

Any analysis that relies on how the score ended up in the game will be ignored.

 

[Pipes]

It was right to go for it but he should have given the ball to Grant on 2nd, 3rd, and then (if needed) on 4th down. His play calling is atrocious. MM proves yet again he is a terrible coach.

What does the play call have to do with Lee dropping a pass that hit him in the hands? Yeah the play calling wasn't great but shouldn't Lee be held accountable for dropping a catchable ball?

 

[SKribbles]

Right decision wrong play call.

SNEAK THE DAMN BALL! I should damn well hope that two straight sneaks from the 1 should get you into the endzone.

 

[sho nuff]

62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call. My faith in the SP is restored. Used to be a lot of arguing about this back in the day.

Umm...way to skew that.

What?

"62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call."You gave both categories of yes answers...but only counted the absolutely the wrong calls for the no.WHy not add both up?

 

[sho nuff]

62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call. My faith in the SP is restored. Used to be a lot of arguing about this back in the day.

and the "crowd mentality" is wrong again....there was waayyyy too much time to walk away from the 3 points...a FG there makes it 28-17, then when they do score the TD and kick the PAT, 28-24 (was 28-20 @that point)...

the saftey pushes it to 30-24

the late FG puts them @30-27

at this point a long FG would have tied the score, rather than need a TD when it was 30-23

I see coaches do this too often, when clearly the move was to kick the near lock 20 yd'er

and BTW...the question as posed is totally flawed....you are asking us to give a judgement on a play where time and score are essential to the decision made on the field, then tell us "arguement refering to the final score" will be ignored

following that logic, never go for the FG as the 6+1 for the TD (if made) is always better than the 3

Or...even different instead of the late FG...you know you need the TD to take the lead and you get to go after that rather than settle for the FG and hope to get an onsides kick.The timing of it is why I said it was the wrong call.

 

[sho nuff]

62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call. My faith in the SP is restored. Used to be a lot of arguing about this back in the day.

and the "crowd mentality" is wrong again....there was waayyyy too much time to walk away from the 3 points...a FG there makes it 28-17, then when they do score the TD and kick the PAT, 28-24 (was 28-20 @that point)...the saftey pushes it to 30-24the late FG puts them @30-27at this point a long FG would have tied the score, rather than need a TD when it was 30-23I see coaches do this too often, when clearly the move was to kick the near lock 20 yd'er

Took a while, but here's 1.

Any analysis that relies on how the score ended up in the game will be ignored.

If you ignore the final score...you ignore why it was the wrong call.You kick it there for reasons so as not to lead to the way the scoring ended up. Its like going for 2 in the 3rd quarter when you don't yet need to.

 

[Stinger Ray]

If Donald Lee catches that pass that hit him in the chest then it was the right call.

 

[ravnzfan]

62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call. My faith in the SP is restored. Used to be a lot of arguing about this back in the day.

and the "crowd mentality" is wrong again....there was waayyyy too much time to walk away from the 3 points...a FG there makes it 28-17, then when they do score the TD and kick the PAT, 28-24 (was 28-20 @that point)...

the saftey pushes it to 30-24

the late FG puts them @30-27

at this point a long FG would have tied the score, rather than need a TD when it was 30-23

I see coaches do this too often, when clearly the move was to kick the near lock 20 yd'er

Took a while, but here's 1.

Any analysis that relies on how the score ended up in the game will be ignored.

which is I why I edited my response---missed this little gem the 1st time around---sorry for thatyou've asked us to comment on the decision made on the field to go for a TD when the score and time left are clearly taken into consideration when making that decision

...then you tell us to ignore those facts?

 

[Werewolf Moderator Fan]

you've asked us to comment on the decision made on the field to go for a TD when the score and time left are clearly taken into consideration when making that decision

...then you tell us to ignore those facts?

When did I ever tell you to ignore the score and time left at the time of the decision?

 

[mozzy84]

From JSOnline...McCarthy's comments on that play.On whether he considered kicking a field goal on 4th and 1: "No, I play to win. I thought it was a good play. The third down call bothers me more than anything. They're in a goal-line defense and we are in a goal-line offense and we are in a play we call "tempo play." The ball was held up by the referee and I didn't have time to change the play. I liked the fourth down call. I wish I could have the third down call back."

the more I watch McCarthy coach the more I like him

 

[ravnzfan]

62% say yes. Only 15% think it's absolutely the wrong call. My faith in the SP is restored. Used to be a lot of arguing about this back in the day.

and the "crowd mentality" is wrong again....there was waayyyy too much time to walk away from the 3 points...a FG there makes it 28-17, then when they do score the TD and kick the PAT, 28-24 (was 28-20 @that point)...the saftey pushes it to 30-24the late FG puts them @30-27at this point a long FG would have tied the score, rather than need a TD when it was 30-23I see coaches do this too often, when clearly the move was to kick the near lock 20 yd'er

Took a while, but here's 1.

Any analysis that relies on how the score ended up in the game will be ignored.

If you ignore the final score...you ignore why it was the wrong call.You kick it there for reasons so as not to lead to the way the scoring ended up. Its like going for 2 in the 3rd quarter when you don't yet need to.

thank you sho nuff...totally goofy questionfollowing the logic OP posses would have every HC go for it on 4th down, never kicking a FG---how much sence does that make?you never know---after kicking the FG, Minny could muff the kickoff having GB recover---make no yardage and kick a FG, you are now down 8just ask the Ravens how huge NOT giving NE an easy 3 spot early would have made on that last drive---they would much rather been down 3 @24-21 on that final driveI'm not a big fan of leaving points on the field, and would not consider such a move down 14 and over 1/4 of football to play---not kicking that FG cost them 4 points as they had to try a 2 pt'er later that failed

 

[ravnzfan]

you've asked us to comment on the decision made on the field to go for a TD when the score and time left are clearly taken into consideration when making that decision

...then you tell us to ignore those facts?

When did I ever tell you to ignore the score and time left at the time of the decision?

when you said "any analysis that relies on how the score ened up will be ignored"

 

[Werewolf Moderator Fan]

If you ignore the final score...you ignore why it was the wrong call.You kick it there for reasons so as not to lead to the way the scoring ended up. Its like going for 2 in the 3rd quarter when you don't yet need to.

I agree with you here. Mike McCarthy definitely should've factored in what the final score would be when he was deciding to go for it.

 

[TitusIII]

Any offense worth their salt can get one yard, even against a good D like the Vikings. Of course, given the terrible play of the Packers offensive line, the decision is a bit tougher, but you take the chance. Worst case, you have the oppsing team pinned at the 1...

 

[Werewolf Moderator Fan]

following the logic OP posses would have every HC go for it on 4th down, never kicking a FG---how much sence does that make?

I never said this either. But if my only choices on 4th and 10 from my own 20 yard line is to go for it or kick a FG, I'd definitely go for the former.

you never know---after kicking the FG, Minny could muff the kickoff having GB recover---make no yardage and kick a FG, you are now down 8

Well of course. If you only analyze the good things that can happen for Green Bay after the FG and ignore other factors, the FG attempt looks better. What's odd is that an example of something good that can happen for GB after a failed conversion actually happened shortly afterwards (the sack in the EZ for a safety).

 

[Godsbrother]

If Donald Lee catches that pass that hit him in the chest then it was the right call.

But since he didn't they should have gone for the FG.Being a Tuesday-morning HC is fun!

 

[Dexter Manley]

It was easily the right call to go for the td there, and it's not even close.

What the people who are advocating taking the 3 points are forgetting, is that even if GB doesn't score a td there, Minny is backed up against there own goalline, and isn't likely to start a long drive down the field, which means GB will get the ball back in great field position most of the time. Such good field position that they would likely only need 1 first down to get into good field goal range.

Going for the td on 4th and goal from the 1 yard line is the closest thing to a free roll that occurs in the NFL.

 

[Werewolf Moderator Fan]

Going for the td on 4th and goal from the 1 yard line is the closest thing to a free roll that occurs in the NFL.

Yeah I don't get how people don't see this. I don't think there's any other position on the field with better odds for a TD than your opponent's 1 yard line. So you don't want to go for it then, but want to go for it later when it will be harder?

 

[parasaurolophus]

McCarthy is a moron, but he got this one right.

 

[Werewolf Moderator Fan]

So far Hov34 is the only one who is indisputably correct. There definitely were only four lights.

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

good decision

horrible play calling

 

[Hov34]

So far Hov34 is the only one who is indisputably correct. There definitely were only four lights.

 

[mozzy84]

It was easily the right call to go for the td there, and it's not even close.

What the people who are advocating taking the 3 points are forgetting, is that even if GB doesn't score a td there, Minny is backed up against there own goalline, and isn't likely to start a long drive down the field, which means GB will get the ball back in great field position most of the time. Such good field position that they would likely only need 1 first down to get into good field goal range.

Going for the td on 4th and goal from the 1 yard line is the closest thing to a free roll that occurs in the NFL.

Besides being backed up to the goal line none of that happened though, just sayin....

 

[Jack Burton]

There was still three minutes left in the third, of course you take the points. If they had taken a field goal at that point then they would've been driving late in the game for the win instead of needing two scores to tie. The score would be 28- 17. Nelsons TD would make the score 30- 24. GB's final drive ended with a field goal but they could've been in position to win.

 

[Deranged Hermit]

There was still three minutes left in the third, of course you take the points. If they had taken a field goal at that point then they would've been driving late in the game for the win instead of needing two scores to tie. The score would be 28- 17. Nelsons TD would make the score 30- 24. GB's final drive ended with a field goal but they could've been in position to win.

You never leave points out on the field when they are there for the taking in the 1st-3rd quarter. You're inevitably always chasing those points later....

 

[TitusIII]

There was still three minutes left in the third, of course you take the points. If they had taken a field goal at that point then they would've been driving late in the game for the win instead of needing two scores to tie. The score would be 28- 17. Nelsons TD would make the score 30- 24. GB's final drive ended with a field goal but they could've been in position to win.

You never leave points out on the field when they are there for the taking in the 1st-3rd quarter. You're inevitably always chasing those points later....

I'd love to see what the guys from footballoutsiders have to say about this. I'm sure they have this broken down in expected value terms...I'd be shocked if going for the TD from the 1 yard line is ever the wrong call, at least from pure EV standpoint.

 

[Dexter Manley]

It was easily the right call to go for the td there, and it's not even close.

What the people who are advocating taking the 3 points are forgetting, is that even if GB doesn't score a td there, Minny is backed up against there own goalline, and isn't likely to start a long drive down the field, which means GB will get the ball back in great field position most of the time. Such good field position that they would likely only need 1 first down to get into good field goal range.

Going for the td on 4th and goal from the 1 yard line is the closest thing to a free roll that occurs in the NFL.

Besides being backed up to the goal line none of that happened though, just sayin....

I realize that. Obviously, it's not automatic. Heck, same thing happened in the WAS-DET game last week when Portis was stuffed on 4th and goal from the 1, and the Lions ended up driving 99 yards from a td. That doesn't happen very often though.Think about it this way. If you could choose to have the ball on offense for 1 play to try and score a td, the opponent's 1 yard line would be the optimal place to spot the ball, right?

If you could choose what yard line to spot the ball on for your opponent to start a drive, their own 1 yard line would be the optimal spot to place the ball, agreed?

GB was never going to have a better opportunity to score on 1 play than they did on the 1 yard line on 4th and 1.

And if they didn't score the td, Minny was going to have the worst starting field position possible.

It's a no brainer to go for the td there, even if the game would have been tied in the 3rd quarter, instead of them being down by 14.

 

[pollardsvision]

At the time, I thought it was absolutely the right call. I didn't think the GB defense was going to slow down the MIN offense (but they did). I thought they'd need TDs and not FGs to win.

In general, I'm a fan of going for 4th and 1 in most situations.

In this situation, I main reason I could've seen for not going for it was b/c the GB O-line was so out-matched. That's a tough thing for a coach have to admit though.