lawofmurphy Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Interesting that when Mike Smith decided to go for 4th and 1 in OT against the Saints, it was a big to-do, but when Gary Kubiak goes for 4th and 1 midway through the 4th quarter in a tie game, it's largely overlooked. Obviously, the situations weren't completely analogous, but they were close enough that it should be pointed out. Going for 4th and 1 is USUALLY the right statistical call. Here's one of the majority of times where it works out. Houston converted easily, scored a few plays later, and Atlanta got into FG range later in the game but went for the tying TD to no avail. Coaches should keep going for the wins... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Interesting that when Mike Smith decided to go for 4th and 1 in OT against the Saints, it was a big to-do, but when Gary Kubiak goes for 4th and 1 midway through the 4th quarter in a tie game, it's largely overlooked. Obviously, the situations weren't completely analogous, but they were close enough that it should be pointed out. Going for 4th and 1 is USUALLY the right statistical call. Here's one of the majority of times where it works out. Houston converted easily, scored a few plays later, and Atlanta got into FG range later in the game but went for the tying TD to no avail. Coaches should keep going for the wins... Easy decision for armchair HCs, but going out on downs is essentially equivalent to a turnover. That's a hugh risk late in a close game, where giving the opponent prime field position can result in moving a relatively small portion of the field to end the game with a FG. Easy to say go for it, when you have nothing at stake but some text on a FF MB, because statistcally it's the right call - but given the situation it takes some mighty large cajones and even with the odds in your favor may be a really poor coaching decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 (edited) Refresh my memory. They weren't on their side of the field too, were they? Because that was the main reason why Smith got hammered for the call, when coupled with the fact that it was overtime, not regulation. Had they been on the Saints side just out of field-goal range then they wouldn't have gotten so much heat; But by not making it on your own side of the field, you set them up in field-goal range (with a FG all that is needed to win in overtime, and the Falcons having no ability to match the score). That is far different than going for it in regulation, where even if it doesn't work, you still have an opportunity to come back. Smith effectively eliminated that chance. However, I was one of the ones who argued that it wasn't a bad call from Smith, because of the weaknesses of the Falcons pass D and punter to try to stop Drew Brees and Sproles yet again (in addition to his confidence in Turner in short-yardage).... But it's not in the same ballpark as most 4th down calls on the other team's side of the field and in regulation. Edited December 8, 2011 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Didn't see the HOU game or recall hearing about it. But if as you say "Obviously, the situations weren't completely analogous" then I have to think there was a significant (not minor difference). The case with Smith going for it meant "if you miss game over you lose". If that wasn't the same or close to that, then its understandable that Kubiak didn't take heat. Also depends on the outcome. Had the Falcons got the 1st down (or not lost) it probably wouldn't be criticized as much. It would be like saying that if Garrett took that time out and the second FG was good (or first one wasn't) that it wouldn't have been as bad a call or deserved the criticism. I was watching that game on NFL Replay last night and as soon as the TO was called (you could hear whistles before the ball was even snapped) the announcers said "And the Cardinals take a time out." They even showed Wisenhunt on the sideline, the flashed to Garrett making the TO signal (extra footage no doubt added in the replay mix). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Was it this situation when he went for 4-1 (only one I see in 4Q for Texans) 4-1-ATL 9 (7:30) 23-A.Foster right tackle to ATL 2 for 7 yards (24-D.Franks, 71-K.Biermann). So he could have kicked a FG and given the ball back to the Falcons with half a quarter to go down by 3 in a close game (it was 10-10 at that time). Or go for the TD and make sure you force them to score a TD to tie. (Also note the last Falcons posession resulted in a TD.) Not just not completely the same but vastly different circumstances. Also since they say 4-1 whether it is a yard (or maybe up to 1.5 yards) or just inches its hard to know the true yardage needed. ATL-HOU week 13 full play-by-play Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 4-1-ATL 9 (7:30) 23-A.Foster right tackle to ATL 2 for 7 yards (24-D.Franks, 71-K.Biermann). On ATL's 9? Yes, I'd say pinning them back near their goal-line in a tie game if you don't make it, is alot different than setting them up with a FG in overtime on your side of the field if you don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Was it this situation when he went for 4-1 (only one I see in 4Q for Texans) 4-1-ATL 9 (7:30) 23-A.Foster right tackle to ATL 2 for 7 yards (24-D.Franks, 71-K.Biermann). So he could have kicked a FG and given the ball back to the Falcons with half a quarter to go down by 3 in a close game (it was 10-10 at that time). Or go for the TD and make sure you force them to score a TD to tie. (Also note the last Falcons posession resulted in a TD.) Not just not completely the same but vastly different circumstances. Also since they say 4-1 whether it is a yard (or maybe up to 1.5 yards) or just inches its hard to know the true yardage needed. ATL-HOU week 13 full play-by-play If that's the series, than Kubiak is an idiot to not take the points there in a tie game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 If that's the series, than Kubiak is an idiot to not take the points there in a tie game. Seriously? (Never know when people are joking here.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Seriously? (Never know when people are joking here.) Yeah. If it's a tie game and I have a chance for points halfway through the 4th quarter, I take the points every time and let my #1 ranked defense protect the lead. If by chance they do get into scoring range and you keep them out of the endzone, the worst that happens is a tie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 (edited) If that's the series, than Kubiak is an idiot to not take the points there in a tie game. Ya know, at first I thought it was a good move (especially since they made it), but you have to have supreme confidence in your ability to pick it up (though maybe he did with Foster back there). Otherwise, it doesn't make a ton of sense to pin them back if you don't make it, when you could easily kick it, take the points, and then put them just 10 yards up the field further with a lead. You'd need your defense to hold either way. In the Falcons case, it was a matter of having more confidence in Turner than to stop Brees again, and maybe that was a factor here too, but the difference between kicking it and not making it is so minscule that the smart move is to take the points, I agree. Edited December 8, 2011 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 (edited) My bad. Based on stevegrabs post, I thought the game was tied there. Houston was going for the TD to tie. Should have read the game log first. Edited December 8, 2011 by Chief Dick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 My bad. Based on stevegrabs post, I thought the game was tied there. Houston was going for the TD to tie. Should have read the game log first. Actually I was going to point out that I think the game log has a mistake, as I believe this was a 10-10 tie at that point. END QUARTER 3 ATL 10 HOU 17 Plays: 19 Possession: 10:41 4th Quarter That appeard to be wrong since this TD was the final score in the game. The 2nd line above is clearly the end of the scoring drive with TD in 4th Qtr. I see your and delusions points. Not saying it was a no brainer, or not even a bad decision, just vastly different from Smiths call in OT of ATL-NO game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 It was a tie game at the time, with about 7:30 left in the 4th. It was also less than a yard. I was watching the game at the time and loved the call -- the Texans had been running wild on the Falcons that whole drive; its perfectly reasonable to expect your #1 rushing offense to pick up a half yard when it needs to. I think Kubiak was also thinking that if he doesn't get it, the Falcons are pinned at their 10 yard line and if his D holds (as they had all day) he'll get the ball back in good field position anyway. It's not at all similar to the Falcons call in OT against the Saints -- the downside of not converting the 4th down there was a near certain loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 It was a tie game at the time, with about 7:30 left in the 4th. It was also less than a yard. I was watching the game at the time and loved the call -- the Texans had been running wild on the Falcons that whole drive; its perfectly reasonable to expect your #1 rushing offense to pick up a half yard when it needs to. I think Kubiak was also thinking that if he doesn't get it, the Falcons are pinned at their 10 yard line and if his D holds (as they had all day) he'll get the ball back in good field position anyway. It's not at all similar to the Falcons call in OT against the Saints -- the downside of not converting the 4th down there was a near certain loss. Except the last posession where they scored a TD. That possibly contributed to going for it, since he wasn't sure they'd stop them the next time, didn't want to get 3 pts then give up a TD and be down by 4. Agree on your last point, which goes directly to the OP's question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.