Jump to content


4th and Goal at the one


  • Please log in to reply
98 replies to this topic

#1 Braedenstearns

Braedenstearns

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 560 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 11:48 AM

I know people are probably saying " if we kicked the field goal then we would have won!" But I like it how he feels comfortable doing that, even though he had a practice squad QB in the game.  

OK. Now... Who thinks it was a bad move or was it a good move.

Only thing I didn't like is how we ran the same play three downs in a row!!

#2 Buftex

Buftex

    JIM KELLY: the reason for the seasons!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,714 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 11:54 AM

I didn't mind them going for it at all, though I was not crazy about the play that was called.

It is easy to criticize when it doesn't work...but people saying they would have won if they had just kicked a field goal there are silly.  They are assuming that everything else that happened in the game after that point wold  be exactly the same...and it wouldn't have.

#3 BillsFan-4-Ever

BillsFan-4-Ever

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,673 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 11:55 AM

cost the Bills the game

#4 The Big Cat

The Big Cat

    Prowling.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,177 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 11:57 AM

View PostBillsFan-4-Ever, on 14 October 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

cost the Bills the game

So did the interference on Goodwin. So did the 64 yard screen play. So did Lewis' fumble. So did the 34 yard end around.

C'mon, really?

I liked the fourth down play call...on SECOND down. Second or first down was the opportunity for a naked boot or a PA. Not fourth.

Edited by The Big Cat, 14 October 2013 - 11:57 AM.


#5 BuffOrange

BuffOrange

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,268 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 11:57 AM

It was a good call because the math says so.
I hate hindsight analysis but as long as people want to do it, we still lose with a FG (because the Chandler TD doesn't happen) and we win with a TD.

Meanwhile people in Baltimore are apparently assuming GB would've taken a knee in FG range to run out the clock, losing by 1pt.  That's even better.

#6 DGW54321

DGW54321

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,268 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 11:58 AM

Play calling down there stunk.

#7 Braedenstearns

Braedenstearns

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 560 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:00 PM

View PostBuftex, on 14 October 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

I didn't mind them going for it at all, though I was not crazy about the play that was called.

It is easy to criticize when it doesn't work...but people saying they would have won if they had just kicked a field goal there are silly.  They are assuming that everything else that happened in the game after that point wold  be exactly the same...and it wouldn't have.

That's what I agree with. If he made it most people here would be saying that he is a great play caller!

#8 iEat_Phins

iEat_Phins

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 198 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:01 PM

View PostThe Big Cat, on 14 October 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

So did the interference on Goodwin. So did the 64 yard screen play. So did Lewis' fumble. So did the 34 yard end around.

C'mon, really?

I liked the fourth down play call...on SECOND down. Second or first down was the opportunity for a naked boot or a PA. Not fourth.

Exactly. When you have 1st and goal at the one you plan for 4 downs to get it in and try a variety of ways to do so. Not three of the exact same plays then a gutsy call on fourth down.

#9 Dean Cain

Dean Cain

    DAS AUTO

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,385 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:02 PM

I think Choice is the best goal line back. He seems to be able to get lower than spiller & Jackson & can drive .

#10 zevo

zevo

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,293 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:06 PM

How anybody could say we would have won is beyond me....no one knows how the game would have played out if we kick the field goal...you can't add the 3 points to the score and say victory....doesn't work like that and if you think that....please help yourself.

#11 Fan in Chicago

Fan in Chicago

    Holier than thou

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,902 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:08 PM

I wanted to take the points especially considering the terrible first 3 plays. We were not blowing their D line off the ball either. We were not in desperate mode at that time. Against a good D, take the points.

I am not sure it would have changed the final outcome as game strategy from the Bengals may have changed. Also, we are not a high powered Denver offense to overcome mistakes/missed chances.

#12 JPS

JPS

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,723 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:12 PM

View PostBillsFan-4-Ever, on 14 October 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

cost the Bills the game
No. The decision to go didn't cost them. Not making it in did.

#13 thebandit27

thebandit27

    Armchair Dynasty Architect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,060 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:13 PM

View PostBraedenstearns, on 14 October 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

I know people are probably saying " if we kicked the field goal then we would have won!" But I like it how he feels comfortable doing that, even though he had a practice squad QB in the game.  

OK. Now... Who thinks it was a bad move or was it a good move.

Only thing I didn't like is how we ran the same play three downs in a row!!

At the time, I wanted them to kick for 2 reasons:

1) It would have tied the game 10-10, which is fine by me 2 minutes into the 2nd quarter
2) For a QB starting his first NFL game, I don't want him to put together an 80-yard drive that ends with zero points

That said, it actually makes no difference.  Had they kicked, the impact would've been that they likely wouldn't have gone for it on 4th down when Lewis threw the TD to Chandler to make it 24-17.  With the earlier field goal, a score of 24-13 means that they could've kicked another field goal and it would've been a one-score game at 24-16.

So the more likely difference is that they would've needed to score a 2-point conversion after Goodwin's TD.

View PostBillsFan-4-Ever, on 14 October 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

cost the Bills the game

Not really...see above.

#14 Meark

Meark

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,155 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:18 PM

Running the same play the three previous plays was horrible. I can't believe they didn't try to spread out the defense. :wallbash:

#15 Rubes

Rubes

    The Doctor of Football...is IN

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,984 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:20 PM

View PostBigCountryBills, on 14 October 2013 - 12:02 PM, said:

I think Choice is the best goal line back. He seems to be able to get lower than spiller & Jackson & can drive .

Right now he's also faster than both, which would help if they tried anything other than straight up the middle.

#16 Just in Atlanta

Just in Atlanta

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,993 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:30 PM

View PostBillsFan-4-Ever, on 14 October 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

cost the Bills the game
No it didn't.

You could say Fred's inability to get in cost the game. Or Kiko not making one more tackle. Or this. Or that.

If we hadn't gone for it, we would never had thrown the td to Goodwin on fourth down.

Going for it was the right call at the time.

#17 JM57

JM57

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,345 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:38 PM

Positive: going for it.

Negatives: your QB is 2 yards tall and you only need a yard. Spread the formation and sneak it behind Wood and Urbik.

Don't run out of the same formation 4 times in a row.

No one is fooled by Thomas freakin Welch running a flare route on 4th and goal

#18 ricojes

ricojes

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,967 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:45 PM

View PostBraedenstearns, on 14 October 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

I know people are probably saying " if we kicked the field goal then we would have won!" But I like it how he feels comfortable doing that, even though he had a practice squad QB in the game.  

OK. Now... Who thinks it was a bad move or was it a good move.

Only thing I didn't like is how we ran the same play three downs in a row!!
Marrone would have been put in the Gailey category on this board had he gone for the FG.  The play call was the issue, that was a 1st or 2nd down call.  I would have ran the ball with Fred again.  I don't think there are too many coaches that would have kicked the FG in that situation...

Edited by ricojes, 14 October 2013 - 12:46 PM.


#19 artmalibu

artmalibu

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 536 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:52 PM

Put the points on the board!!! Chan got cute once or twice and went for 2 in the first half that ended up costing the game. BAD call, BAD coaching.

Plus I think that the coach was telling the team that they didnt have a chance to win the game without taking risks, and then coming away with nothing is even more demoralizing.

My thoughts are not from hindsight, I was mad when the kicker came onto the field.

#20 mjt328

mjt328

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 01:04 PM

There are really good arguments for either choice (as you can see above).


Personally, I would have gone for it.  As Marrone said, the odds of picking up ONE YARD and taking the lead are in the Bills favor.  If we somehow failed, there was a good chance we could make a quick stop and get great field position right back.


I've never been one to shy away from criticizing our coaching staff when they make a mistake.  This was not one of those times.  You cannot judge a coaching decision based purely on the end result.  It is their job to put the team in the best position to succeed.  It's on the players to execute.  With that said... Did Hackett put the Bills in the best position to succeed with his play calling at the goal line?  That's another story...