Keep the points or take the first down?

Originally posted by cwilson830:

Originally posted by KID9R:
Except for last week when he did it right? Or let me guess, that wasn't one of the NEVER EVER'S it was different.

Theres exceptions to every rule. A fresh set of downs inside the 5 would certainly be an exception.

Originally posted by monsterzero789:

Originally posted by cwilson830:

Originally posted by monsterzero789:

Originally posted by cwilson830:

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:

Originally posted by Joecool:
This does not include context. If Poker players and Black jack players strictly went by stats, they would be losers. You must go by context more than anything and their offense was starting to rev up and our primary goal should have been keeping that offense off the field for longer.

I got your context right here . . .

Dallas' 2nd half drives . . .

Drive #1 - Kitna at QB / 7 Plays/48 yards / Ends with Whitner INT
Drive #2 - Kitna at QB / Short Field due to Smith INT / 5 Plays/18 Yards / TD to Austin
Drive #3 - Kitna at QB / 6 Plays/23 yards / Ends with Brock INT
Drive #4 - Romo at QB / 3 Plays/-2 yards / Punt (Romo looked like a whipped puppy)

Then the Akers FG to go up 10, which looked pretty damn good at the time . . .in context as you say.

Then the D fell a sleep and Romo went off.

Context meaning getting the ball 15 yards closer to the End Zone. It wasn't a 5 yard penalty that would probably force us to kick a 50 yard FG. It was a 15 yard penalty.

Now let us throw in more context.
1. DAL will go into two-minute offense mode.
2. 11 minutes remaining to score 10 points.
3. DAL has a top 10 QB
4. We couldn't stop 82 all game
5. TOP.

If you trust your offense, you take the first down. Harbaugh doesn't have a lot of trust in our offense.

This had nothing to do with the offense. It was about trusting the defense to hold a 2 score lead with 10 minutes left.

lol if that were the case we might as well kick on first down when we're in field goal range

Wha? your not even making sense anymore

What part of what I said was confusing?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the decision (we don't know what Harbaugh knows after seeing the O day in and day out). But if we assume Harbaugh made an informed/intelligent decision, he decided: 3 points (and therefore, two-score lead) > a FG attempt + the time run off the clock - the potential for a turnover / negative yardage.
--------------------------------------------
You cant take away guaranteed points in that position. Crazy things happen in football (all Craig had to do was hold on to the ball) to try to risk, what, a minute and a half, maybe 2 trying to go 3 and another field goal (which in itself also isn't guaranteed). But that doesn't mean Harbaugh doesn't trust the offense. He put his money on the D who had only allowed 14 points in 50 minutes of action to hold 10 points over the last 11 minutes. Which was the right call. Now of course we know that the D folded like a house of cards but that doesn't change the fact that the call to keep the points was the right one.

edit: quotes got messed up

Originally posted by monsterzero789:

Originally posted by cwilson830:

Originally posted by KID9R:

Except for last week when he did it right? Or let me guess, that wasn't one of the NEVER EVER'S it was different.

Theres exceptions to every rule. A fresh set of downs inside the 5 would certainly be an exception.

Originally posted by monsterzero789:

Originally posted by cwilson830:

Originally posted by monsterzero789:

Originally posted by cwilson830:

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:

Originally posted by Joecool:

This does not include context. If Poker players and Black jack players strictly went by stats, they would be losers. You must go by context more than anything and their offense was starting to rev up and our primary goal should have been keeping that offense off the field for longer.

I got your context right here . . .

Dallas' 2nd half drives . . .

Drive #1 - Kitna at QB / 7 Plays/48 yards / Ends with Whitner INT
Drive #2 - Kitna at QB / Short Field due to Smith INT / 5 Plays/18 Yards / TD to Austin
Drive #3 - Kitna at QB / 6 Plays/23 yards / Ends with Brock INT
Drive #4 - Romo at QB / 3 Plays/-2 yards / Punt (Romo looked like a whipped puppy)

Then the Akers FG to go up 10, which looked pretty damn good at the time . . .in context as you say.

Then the D fell a sleep and Romo went off.

Context meaning getting the ball 15 yards closer to the End Zone. It wasn't a 5 yard penalty that would probably force us to kick a 50 yard FG. It was a 15 yard penalty.

Now let us throw in more context.
1. DAL will go into two-minute offense mode.
2. 11 minutes remaining to score 10 points.
3. DAL has a top 10 QB
4. We couldn't stop 82 all game
5. TOP.

If you trust your offense, you take the first down. Harbaugh doesn't have a lot of trust in our offense.

This had nothing to do with the offense. It was about trusting the defense to hold a 2 score lead with 10 minutes left.

lol if that were the case we might as well kick on first down when we're in field goal range

Wha? your not even making sense anymore

What part of what I said was confusing?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the decision (we don't know what Harbaugh knows after seeing the O day in and day out). But if we assume Harbaugh made an informed/intelligent decision, he decided: 3 points (and therefore, two-score lead) > a FG attempt + the time run off the clock - the potential for a turnover / negative yardage.
--------------------------------------------
You cant take away guaranteed points in that position. Crazy things happen in football (all Craig had to do was hold on to the ball) to try to risk, what, a minute and a half, maybe 2 trying to go 3 and another field goal (which in itself also isn't guaranteed). But that doesn't mean Harbaugh doesn't trust the offense. He put his money on the D who had only allowed 14 points in 50 minutes of action to hold 10 points over the last 11 minutes. Which was the right call. Now of course we know that the D folded like a house of cards but that doesn't change the fact that the call to keep the points was the right one.

edit: quotes got messed up

Np, I think the busted quotes were my fault. If our QB is Brady, Payton, Brees, etc., you think we stick with the FG? Like I said, I'm not disagreeing with the decision, but I do think it says something about Harbaugh's trust in the offense.

Originally posted by monsterzero789:

What part of what I said was confusing?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the decision (we don't know what Harbaugh knows after seeing the O day in and day out). But if we assume Harbaugh made an informed/intelligent decision, he decided: 3 points (and therefore, two-score lead) > a FG attempt + the time run off the clock - the potential for a turnover / negative yardage.
--------------------------------------------
You cant take away guaranteed points in that position. Crazy things happen in football (all Craig had to do was hold on to the ball) to try to risk, what, a minute and a half, maybe 2 trying to go 3 and another field goal (which in itself also isn't guaranteed). But that doesn't mean Harbaugh doesn't trust the offense. He put his money on the D who had only allowed 14 points in 50 minutes of action to hold 10 points over the last 11 minutes. Which was the right call. Now of course we know that the D folded like a house of cards but that doesn't change the fact that the call to keep the points was the right one.

edit: quotes got messed up

You're citing the Craig fumble!? You can win games afraid of "crazy things". You go by odds and common sense. There was about a 90% chance that we get at least three yards running it three times. Tell Gore put two hands on the ball get what you can. Then an 88% chance Akers makes the FG again. And a very good chance we take at least 2 minutes off the clock.

Wrong decision.

Seattle scenario: We were up 16-10. Seattle had just driven the field from their 15 to our 20 before Jackson fumbled. After the fumble we took over at the start of the 4th quarter and drove the ball 83 yards in 12 plays and took 7:45 off the clock before the roughing the kicker penalty. We were at the 1 yard line where a TD should have been like a lay up. It wasn't, but we were able to run another 2:13 off the clock leaving Seattle with 5:54.

Dallas scenario: We were up 21-14. Up to that point in the second half we picked Kitna twice, they had one Kitna TD set-up by a short field, then Romo had a 3 & out and looked awkward doing it. Our three previous possessions went 3 & out, 2 & INT, 3 & out, 1 & TD (short field to Walker). After the Romo 3 & out we got the ball on Dallas' 46 and we could only manage 9 yards before Harbaugh went for the 55 yarder for the ten point lead. The penalty would have put us at the 22.

Different situations. Different ebb and flow. I think with the way the Dallas offense was going in the 2nd half Harbaugh had to believe running another 2:15 off the clock wasn't worth the risk and 10 points was enough against a dinged-up Romo.

Even with no evidence that our defense was about to implode, in hindsight it would have been nice take another couple minutes off the clock to put more pressure on Romo. But who knows if that even makes a difference? Dallas isn't exactly at a disadvantage in two minute mode.

And FWIW I think there is a message from Harbaugh to the offense with these two scenarios. The message is that you need to earn the right to take these shots through consistent play. They did that in the drive leading up taking points off the board against Seattle. They DID NOT yesterday against Dallas so Harbaugh took the points.

The fact that Kitna was throwing Ints and Romo had cracked ribs may have made the choice seem obvious. Romo played one of the most gutsy quarters I have seen. Incredible performance. He deserved to win, but the 9er DBs made it possible with their disappearing act.

I undersand football and Harbaugh's calculations. And he was right, EXCEPT; he was trying to solve the wrong problem:

Winners play to win, losers play not to lose!

We've played not to lose for nearly ten years. Eventually SOME coach is going to say, "enough is enough, if you want to be winners you have to go out and take the game!."

Only after we've taken that step will it matter to take strategic steps like Harbaugh took yesterday.

Both Dallas and us scored a touchdown each in the third quarter. Don't see how we don't have a good chance to waste more time and score another if we got near the red zone.

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
Seattle scenario: We were up 16-10. Seattle had just driven the field from their 15 to our 20 before Jackson fumbled. After the fumble we took over at the start of the 4th quarter and drove the ball 83 yards in 12 plays and took 7:45 off the clock before the roughing the kicker penalty. We were at the 1 yard line where a TD should have been like a lay up. It wasn't, but we were able to run another 2:13 off the clock leaving Seattle with 5:54.

Dallas scenario: We were up 21-14. Up to that point in the second half we picked Kitna twice, they had one Kitna TD set-up by a short field, then Romo had a 3 & out and looked awkward doing it. Our three previous possessions went 3 & out, 2 & INT, 3 & out, 1 & TD (short field to Walker). After the Romo 3 & out we got the ball on Dallas' 46 and we could only manage 9 yards before Harbaugh went for the 55 yarder for the ten point lead. The penalty would have put us at the 22.

Different situations. Different ebb and flow. I think with the way the Dallas offense was going in the 2nd half Harbaugh had to believe running another 2:15 off the clock wasn't worth the risk and 10 points was enough against a dinged-up Romo.

Even with no evidence that our defense was about to implode, in hindsight it would have been nice take another couple minutes off the clock to put more pressure on Romo. But who knows if that even makes a difference? Dallas isn't exactly at a disadvantage in two minute mode.

And FWIW I think there is a message from Harbaugh to the offense with these two scenarios. The message is that you need to earn the right to take these shots through consistent play. They did that in the drive leading up taking points off the board against Seattle. They DID NOT yesterday against Dallas so Harbaugh took the points.

Plus there is a big difference between Seattle and Dallas. Dallas is a wayyy better team than Seattle so it was a no-brainer to take the penalty against the Seahawks, and keep the points against the Cowboys.

Originally posted by Joecool:
Both Dallas and us scored a touchdown each in the third quarter. Don't see how we don't have a good chance to waste more time and score another if we got near the red zone.

Besides our 1 play TD, we didn't do sh*t in the third quarter. We couldn't run and Alex was getting the sh*t sacked out of him. In the second half (especially after Romo came back in) Dallas was moving the ball with ease and it was only a matter of time before Romo got hot. I think everybody felt it. I know I did.

Our playcalling after halftime was f**king conservative man. Jeez.

I think we got to take the penalty. At worst we get a couple extra yards to make a shorter field goal. At best we get a touchdown and the game is over.

Double digit lead at home in 4th quarter.

If you cant defend that you deserve to lose.

Originally posted by mayo49:
I think we got to take the penalty. At worst we get a couple extra yards to make a shorter field goal. At best we get a touchdown and the game is over.

What makes you think they couldn't get 2 TD's with 5 minutes left. They did get 1 TD and an intermediate FG. If they HAD to they could have easily made that intermediate FG a TD. They opted for a game tying FG because they didn't have to get a TD.

Originally posted by Blitz:
Why don't you just say "Didn't read."

You want ridiculous?

How about a f**ked up defense and a f**ked up offense? But naw...can't do that...it's like the world all of a sudden eats, sleeps and s**ts on this call that essentially amounts to a grain of a sand on beach of f**kedupness.

News flash: These players are grown men who know exactly where they f**ked up and where they didn't. I am pretty confident their psyche is a hell of a lot tougher than you are making it out to be. I am pretty sure this call is about the farthest thing from their minds right now...and they aren't near the fragile p***y's you are suggesting. They are more than likely not giving a f**k about this call in the least, and are focused on the bigger picture of wherehow they f**ked up at and fixing that.

And besides, If they are as big a mental p***y's as you suggest..then they ain't worth f**k anyways...IE......good luck in the NFL if you are that mentally fragile of player. lol

Andy Reid just admitted today he sent a bad message to the team by being way to cautious with their backup. think you know more than him?

Originally posted by Blitz:
Why don't you just say "Didn't read."

You want ridiculous?

How about a f**ked up defense and a f**ked up offense? But naw...can't do that...it's like the world all of a sudden eats, sleeps and s**ts on this call that essentially amounts to a grain of a sand on beach of f**kedupness.

News flash: These players are grown men who know exactly where they f**ked up and where they didn't. I am pretty confident their psyche is a hell of a lot tougher than you are making it out to be. I am pretty sure this call is about the farthest thing from their minds right now...and they aren't near the fragile p***y's you are suggesting. They are more than likely not giving a f**k about this call in the least, and are focused on the bigger picture of wherehow they f**ked up at and fixing that.

And besides, If they are as big a mental p***y's as you suggest..then they ain't worth f**k anyways...IE......good luck in the NFL if you are that mentally fragile of player. lol

Reid went on to say the conservative approach with the QB sent a bad message to the team.