yall Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 If they follow your suggestion, they lose the time it takes to run that entire play. By snapping it out of bounds, they lost maybe 1 second. But they also gain the possiblity of actually getting a first down. Fair trade off.
shrader Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 But they also gain the possiblity of actually getting a first down. Fair trade off. Then there's also very good possibility that Miami winds up with 7 if the Bills screw up on that 4th down play. If we're going to break down that chances down there, we have to list everything.
Mike in Syracuse Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 This thread is a perfect example of how little your average fan understands. I was SCREAMING when I first saw the play, now that the strategy was explained to me I completely understand it and realize it was the most viable option. The reality is we never should have been in that postion, our offense played like ****!
LabattBlue Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 This thread is a perfect example of how little your average fan understands. I was SCREAMING when I first saw the play, now that the strategy was explained to me I completely understand it and realize it was the most viable option. The reality is we never should have been in that postion, our offense played like ****! I've read the posts defending the choice of taking the safety, but I still think the odds of forcing OT or winning the game in regulation were better if they went for the 4th and 10.
Dr. Fong Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 There's no question about the play call. You go for it. The wise move would have been to run a QB sneak on 1st down to pick up 2-3 yards, give yourself a bit of breathing room, and still have 3 chances to get the other 7. Go for it?!?!? Are you crazy? I can even understand not giving up the 2 pts. and punting, but 4th and 10 from the one inch line is never a smart time to go for it unless there are no other options.
Mike in Syracuse Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 I've read the posts defending the choice of taking the safety, but I still think the odds of forcing OT or winning the game in regulation were better if they went for the 4th and 10. The odds either way were ****ty. The best option would have been to have Trent take the snap in shotgun. If there's not a blown coverage and WR wide open then he could just run out of the endzone. That way you take the safety, but you still have the attempt a keeping the ball.
BobChalmers Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 Bad call IMHO. I understand what they were trying to do, but why not go for it, and if the throw isn't there - take the safety. As bad as TE is, I'm fairly certain he is capable of getting sacked in the end zone. That's the best suggestion I've heard - it would only use 5-10 seconds which is a good deal for a shot at the first.
ganesh Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 One of the things that no one seems to have brought up here. If you see the replay of that 3rd down of Miami, Scott comes in to sack, but made no effort to strip the ball from Henne as he moved the ball down. Imagine what the defense could have done if they had stripped the ball there. In fact Scott was not even looking for the ball except to celebrate the sack.
shrader Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 (edited) I've read the posts defending the choice of taking the safety, but I still think the odds of forcing OT or winning the game in regulation were better if they went for the 4th and 10. What seems to be lost in the discussion is that the defense did their part in this decision. They got the ball back into the Bills' hands as quickly as possible. The ultimate factor in whether or not any strategy was going to be successful was whether or not the offense could get it done. They ran 7 plays in those last 2 minutes and gained what, about 6 yards? That clearly wasn't going to get it done. Whether or not people agree with this decision, it had absolutely no impact on the results of the game (unless you're a betting man). Edited September 13, 2010 by shrader
ganesh Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 (edited) = I see what you are saying but how do you get a punt past the 50, they would basically, be in field goal range almost as soon as they get the ball. so they automatically go up by 6 so you have to score 7 to win anyway. It was a desperate move but not a "horrible strategic decision". If it worked that we got the ball on the punt we could win! we would not be in that field position on a KO (with time on the clock) if we did it your way. This was worth the risk. IMO Agreed. At least Gailey did not make the mental mistakes that Jaruon was constantly doing on the sidelines. That 4th and 11 call for TD was great to see. Jauron would have punted there. Edited September 13, 2010 by ganesh
tennesseeboy Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 I thought the play was quite a good call. Took me a little bit to figure it out but it was the best call for that situation.
timba Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 What seems to be lost in the discussion is that the defense did their part in this decision. They got the ball back into the Bills' hands as quickly as possible. The ultimate factor in whether or not any strategy was going to be successful was whether or not the offense could get it done. They ran 7 plays in those last 2 minutes and gained what, about 6 yards? That clearly wasn't going to get it done. Whether or not people agree with this decision, it had absolutely no impact on the results of the game (unless you're a betting man). This is the important thing with this situation. Our defense was playing much better than our offense in this game. We ended up gaining field position while only giving up two points instead of most likely giving up three or seven if they had gone for it. There was about half a minute left for that final possession, and it was wasted by the offense.
Chandler#81 Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 Wrong - taking a safety would have been the right call only if you were trailing by 4 or 5 points. You never, and I mean never, take a safety in that situation if you are trailing by 3 or less. Its is so much easier to score a field goal than a TD, so you never intentionally put yourself in a situation where you go from just needing a field goal to tie to the case where you have to score a TD. You did not have the time to score a TD. The defense plays prevent, which does not allow for a quick TD, but does allow an offense a decent chance to move into FG range Just a horrible strategic decision there. Very troubling Disagree. Punt formation requires 15 yards from ball to punter. The '1" line' made punting impossible and going for it on 4th & 10 from 1" gives the game away with time on the clock. Sure the 2 pts. made scoring a TD necessary, but it kept us alive in the game and we got the ball back after a punt. I agree completely with the call, given down/distance and clock remaining.
CosmicBills Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 If the team didn't get ANY yards on the first 3 attempts, what makes anyone think that they would have gotten 10+ yards on the 4th attempt? And if that fails, Miami gets the ball at the 1 inch line. Game over. And punting at the 1 inch line means your punter is lined-up about 2/3 of his usual depth, meaning he won't get a good punt off and similarly put the Dols' offense in a great position. The game was over when they took the safety anyway. Taking the safety, hoping to either 1. Get the onsides "free kick" or 2. Stop the Dolphins AND march down for a TD is playing NOT TO LOSE. Exactly what Jauron did game in and game out. The decision was horrible. The right call was to go for it on 4th and 10. If you miss, Dolphins get the ball and the game is over any way. But if you make it, you still have hope. Hell, you could have even called a play on 4th down and told Trent, if no one is open, take a safety and you have the same result. But at least you TRY to win the game.
webtoe Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 The odds either way were ****ty. The term Kobayashi Maru came to mind at that moment during the game. We are discussing two things that each had a miniscule chance of working. You can disagree with which one he chose, but it is clear that we have a coach that is thinking about the strategy options during the game. Now we just need somebody to execute them effectively.
CosmicBills Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 The term Kobayashi Maru came to mind at that moment during the game. We are discussing two things that each had a miniscule chance of working. You can disagree with which one he chose, but it is clear that we have a coach that is thinking about the strategy options during the game. Now we just need somebody to execute them effectively. Well played. And oh so true. Hilarious.
BuffOrange Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 (edited) Wrong - taking a safety would have been the right call only if you were trailing by 4 or 5 points. You never, and I mean never, take a safety in that situation if you are trailing by 3 or less. Its is so much easier to score a field goal than a TD, so you never intentionally put yourself in a situation where you go from just needing a field goal to tie to the case where you have to score a TD. You did not have the time to score a TD. The defense plays prevent, which does not allow for a quick TD, but does allow an offense a decent chance to move into FG range Just a horrible strategic decision there. Very troubling Unfortunately you are 100% correct. The difference between a FG and a TD equates to about 25 yards of field position (that's a conservative estimate assuming they were facing the wind and couldn't make a 50 yarder). This fact completely negates any field position edge that a free kick might bring. Even though it's not a situation that comes up often, it's a pretty good indicator that our coach is a moron. Very troubling indeed. Of course if your main goal is to win the game instead of not lose by 10 points, going for it blows both other options out of the water. Edited September 13, 2010 by BuffOrange
CodeMonkey Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 That 4th and 11 call for TD was great to see. Jauron would have punted there. Disagree. It was within FG range and in my opinion that call was a strategic mistake which was rewarded (and handsomely). A FG makes it a 1 possession game with the D playing well. That play misses and the game is over. As I said in another thread, that play was long on balls but short on brains IMO.
Doc Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 no way. A 4th and 10 from your own 1 inch line has better chances of success than a hail mary. (that is, if you have a QBN willing to throw something more than a checkdown) There ya go. The game was over when they took the safety anyway. Taking the safety, hoping to either 1. Get the onsides "free kick" or 2. Stop the Dolphins AND march down for a TD is playing NOT TO LOSE. Exactly what Jauron did game in and game out. The decision was horrible. The right call was to go for it on 4th and 10. If you miss, Dolphins get the ball and the game is over any way. But if you make it, you still have hope. Hell, you could have even called a play on 4th down and told Trent, if no one is open, take a safety and you have the same result. But at least you TRY to win the game. The Bills had hope when they got the ball back with 30 seconds left. It was six of one, half a dozen of another in reality. But the odds were much greater that the 4th down attempt would have failed (you expect Trent to wait for the perfect pass, and then take a safety if it's not there?) and put the Dols at the 1 inch line.
CodeMonkey Posted September 13, 2010 Posted September 13, 2010 The Bills had hope when they got the ball back with 30 seconds left. It was six of one, half a dozen of another in reality. But the odds were much greater that the 4th down attempt would have failed (you expect Trent to wait for the perfect pass, and then take a safety if it's not there?) and put the Dols at the 1 inch line. I disagree with you here Doc. The safety moved the Bills from a FG to tie and extend the game, to a FG being meaningless and needing a TD. A mistake pure and simple. I do not believe it cost us the game as the other choice was also a longshot at best. But at least the other way there was a shot.
Recommended Posts