Keep the points or take the first down?

Originally posted by A-R-S:
How can people blame Harbs for this?

This game is 100% on our piece of s**t defense,

Have they ever NOT given up a game tying/winning drive?

If the game is on the line you can guarantee our D will give it up. 100% of the time.

Have to say your right on the money.

I know most on this board think our D is one of the top units in the NFL but they are just as shakey as our O.

I don't know if its the play calling on D or the players get tight but they have consistantly given up leads

Another lesson for Jim to put in the memory bank, cause I think the next time a situation like this rolls around he takes the penalty or tells the DC to dial something up.

Nothing worse than blowing a lead like yesterday.

Originally posted by Common:
*Not sure if this has been posted because I didn't read through 12 pages.
Why do you keep the points? Let's look at a similar situation:


http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/101221_tuesday_morning_quarterback&sportCat=nfl

Ho Ho Ho: In the process of getting pounded into fine dust by the San Diego Chargers, the San Francisco 49ers -- who did a lot of boasting in the preseason, then have backed it up by losing games 34-7, 21-0, 31-10 and 31-6 -- had a drive on which they scored three points, then scored six points, then ended up with no points.

With the Bolts leading 7-0, the Squared Sevens kicked a field goal. San Diego was called for "leveraging," the second time in three weeks this unusual call has been made. Accepting the penalty took points off the board but gave San Francisco first-and-goal at the 10. Three snaps later, Alex Smith ran for what officials signaled was a touchdown, but San Diego challenged and the six points came off the board, too. Mike Singletary went for it on fourth-and-goal from the 1. High first-round draft choice guard Mike Iupati air-blocked -- he made contact with no one -- as undrafted Bolts defensive tackle Ogemdi Nwagbuo shot into the backfield to drop the runner for a loss, San Diego ball and zero points for San Francisco.

When did anyone say anything about going for it on 4th and goal? We're talking about 1st and 10 on the 25 with the ability to run over two minutes off the clock. Totally different situation.

Originally posted by nickbradley:
What were the chances that we would score a TD on that drive? Put a % on it.

That percentage doesn't matter. We wouldn't have had to score a TD.

Running it up the middle for ZERO yards, running the clock down to the 2 minute warning, and then attempting a 42 yard FG would be the worst case scenario. Even in that scenario if they missed the FG there would be 2 minutes left and the worst that could happen is Dallas scoring a TD and sending it to OT. Which is what happened anyways.

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.

GREAT POINT JOE THANK YOU FINALLY SOMEONE WITH SENSE THE 49ERS COACH BLEW THAT GAME

Originally posted by jte1979:
Harbaugh sent a bad msg to his team and clearly outthought himself. I think you are going to mess this up if I don't take the 3 points instead of see you guys run an offense with 1st and 10 nearly in the red zone.

I'm sick of hearing "don't take points off the board".

Nolan and Singletary would have taken the points off the board because they allow emotions to get the better of them. Harbaugh told the team he had confidence in them that they could protect a 10 point lead. He lost, but conventional wisdom is usually conventional for a reason and the 9ers are not good enough to spit into the face of reason.

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.

You play to win... He played not to lose.. The same s**t we criticized Singletary for.. Calls like that. and the runs on 3rd and long. Hes not showing me we are a better team except maybe we get the calls in quicker.. He choked.. Bad call call now he got to eat it..

Originally posted by nickbradley:

I must be the only one who understands football, because it seems like I'm the only person supporting the Harbaugh decision. People who are angry simply do not understand the calculation Harbaugh made, and Bill Belichick would have made this decision with our team.

Simply put, the odds of scoring a touchdown were lower than the chance that we miss the make-up field goal, which is about 30% for Akers with 40-49 yard attempts...probably higher outdoors and so-so turf that had caused a lot of slippage during the game.

It was a PERFECT DECISION, a rational decision, a decision that a software program with perfect information would have made. I CHALLENGE ANYONE to make the case that we were more likely to score a touchdown than miss the follow-up.

Here's backup for the pro-Harbaugh case:

1. It's two scores that matters, not 2 touchdowns

2. Gore ran for 2.4 yards per carry and Smith was sacked once every FIVE times he dropped back. Chances of scoring were very low.

3. Accepting the penalty would have put us on the 25, or a 42-yard field goal.

4. If we didn't advance down the field again, Akers would have still been required to kick a 40+ yard field goal.

5. In his career, Akers has missed 3 out of every 10 field goals between 40 and 49 yards.

6. Half of our drives went backwards or nowhere, especially in the second half.

7. Heavy pressure causes turnovers.

This was a terrible decision statistically and testicularly!

1. Two scores is what matters, however time is also just as important. The "ODDS" of Dallas winning the game lessens with the time. We would have eaten up at least 3 more mins. (the same amount of time we took off the clock last week when we took points off the board.)

2. Accepting the penalty would have put us on the 22 yard line or a 40 yard field goal not 25, . I see why you fudged the math on that 55-15=42? Because even using half of Gore's 2.4 yards per carry it moves Akers field goal to the 30-39 yard range where he is ridiculously good at 88% or 97-110. We had 2 negative runs for a total of -2 yards, so "ODDS" are.

3. I don't think we should have thrown and try to get into the end zone after accepting the penalty even though we were 2/2 in the red zone but you have a 0% chance to score when you don't even try. God knows Gore has never busted one 10+ yards after being stuffed most of day. (oh wait nm)

4. If Jim was so worried about the offence screwing up so bad we should just kick field goals on first downs as soon as we're in range from now on, because that is essentially what we did. We declined a 1st down on the 22!

5. Jim also screwed up by not calling time out with about 40 seconds left in regulation so that after Dallas kicked the game tying FG we would have time to go down and kick our own. But it's obvious by the previous blunder he wouldn't have let Alex even try. If he doesn't trust Alex, fine. Then he should have brought in a vet he would.

6. I love Jim and think he's going to bring us back to greatness. But now officially, "his s**t does stink".

It's sort of like Clements not getting down on the ground after the INT in Atlanta---you have to rely on your players to finish out a game and get the win---the players blew the game---not the coach---but I still agree it was a bad decision---get the ball inside the 25 yard line and try to get the TD.

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.

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

Originally posted by nickbradley:
I must be the only one who understands football, because it seems like I'm the only person supporting the Harbaugh decision. People who are angry simply do not understand the calculation Harbaugh made, and Bill Belichick would have made this decision with our team.

Simply put, the odds of scoring a touchdown were lower than the chance that we miss the make-up field goal, which is about 30% for Akers with 40-49 yard attempts...probably higher outdoors and so-so turf that had caused a lot of slippage during the game.

It was a PERFECT DECISION, a rational decision, a decision that a software program with perfect information would have made. I CHALLENGE ANYONE to make the case that we were more likely to score a touchdown than miss the follow-up.

Here's backup for the pro-Harbaugh case:

1. It's two scores that matters, not 2 touchdowns

2. Gore ran for 2.4 yards per carry and Smith was sacked once every FIVE times he dropped back. Chances of scoring were very low.

3. Accepting the penalty would have put us on the 25, or a 42-yard field goal.

4. If we didn't advance down the field again, Akers would have still been required to kick a 40 yard field goal.

5. In his career, Akers has missed 3 out of every 10 field goals between 40 and 49 yards.

6. Half of our drives went backwards or nowhere, especially in the second half.

7. Heavy pressure causes turnovers.

This was a terrible decision statistically and testicularly!

1. Two scores is what matters, however time is also just as important. The "ODDS" of Dallas winning the game lessens with the time. We would have eaten up at least 3 more mins. (the same amount of time we took off the clock last week when we took points off the board.)
2. Accepting the penalty would have put us on the 22 yard line or a 40 yard field goal not 25, . I see why you fudged the math on that 55-15=42? Because even using half of Gore's 2.4 yards per carry it moves Akers field goal to the 30-39 yard range where he is ridiculously good at 88% or 97-110. We had 2 negative runs for a total of -2 yards, so "ODDS" are.
3. I don't think we should have thrown and try to get into the end zone after accepting the penalty even though we were 2/2 in the red zone but you have a 0% chance to score when you don't even try. God knows Gore has never busted one 10+ yards after being stuffed most of day. (oh wait nm)
4. If Jim was so worried about the offence screwing up so bad we should just kick field goals on first downs as soon as we're in range from now on, because that is essentially what we did. We declined a 1st down on the 22!
5. Jim also screwed up by not calling time out with about 40 seconds left in regulation so that after Dallas kicked the game tying FG we would have time to go down and kick our own. But it's obvious by the previous blunder he wouldn't have let Alex even try. If he doesn't trust Alex, fine. Then he should have brought in a vet he would.
6. I love Jim and think he's going to bring us back to greatness. But now officially, "his s**t does stink".

Originally posted by Micky6:
The call was right. You never... NEVER take points off the board when you are in the lead. EVER!!! It's a hard and fast rule that has stood the test of time. The fact that the 9ers lost can not be blamed on the call.

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.

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

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:

Wha? your not even making sense anymore


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

But it's practically the same thing. Run three times and kick a high percentage FG. Eat up time.

And it is like kicking a FG on 1st down.

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.