skibum Posted October 7, 2019 Posted October 7, 2019 Bills D would have stuffed them on the 4th down attempt, so he had no good options.
IgotBILLStopay Posted October 7, 2019 Posted October 7, 2019 7 hours ago, YoloinOhio said: i haven’t seen where he was asked about it. It’s one of the worst calls I’ve ever seen. Does anyone have a valid reason as to why he made that decision? Btw Santos missed 3 FGs before that. 1 was blocked. Just for ya Yolo - I will take a shot at rationalizing Vrabel's decision to try a 53 yard FG on a 4th and 4 and it mostly has to do with perceived probabilities (analytics) 1. Low probability of a conversion on a 4th and 4 against the dominant Bills defense 2. Santos had been more than a capable substitute for Succop the past few games and knowing his kicker - he thought 53 yards was well within his range - he was 8-15 on kicks 50 yards or more before yesterday (so he felt, the kicker's past three misses notwithstanding there was a good chance of a conversion) 3. There was still a lot of time left - so the Titans would be down one score even if the Bills get a FG (if Santos makes the 53 yarder). Just think that on the final drive Allen does not covert the 3rd and 3. Bills would have kicked a FG and still been only up one score. All these analytics defy conventional thinking and take emotion out of decision making - conventionally we are used to thinking kicker is struggling - take it out of his hands (or leg). But if Vrabel and /or his analytics team felt the probability of 2. was significantly higher than 1., then a FG try decision can appeal to him. Please note that this is not to say I agree with Vrabel's decision making- just trying to answer your question in the OP. In the recent Tulane Army game Army was down 3 scores and when they scored a TD went for 2 pt conversion which came back to bite em since they missed. despite scoring a second time and having the ball a third time (and time left on clock for one possession) the game was lost since it was still a two possession game. The coach was heavily criticized for the decision to go for 2. But if analytics tell you going for 2 is the best chancel for winning - you take it.
Buffalo716 Posted October 7, 2019 Posted October 7, 2019 7 hours ago, ddaryl said: What I didn't understand is you are down by 7 with under 7 minutes left to play. Even if you make the FG, you're down by 4, you still need a TD to win. WTF? People can bash the decision but I've seen it happen hundreds of times in the NFL and college Difference is before the FG , a TD would tie, if they made it a FG would win... Either way a TD needs to be scored and he probably honestly thought he could go down and score eventually It's a bad decision but I've seen it soooooo many times it not like it's a vrabel thing
Matt_In_NH Posted October 7, 2019 Posted October 7, 2019 7 hours ago, Circlethewagon8404 said: This is an easy one. He had zero confidence in his offense to move the ball down the field. Against our defense, they were struggling to get 1st downs. Did he make the right call? I actually think so. He knew his chances of getting a 1st down was slim, so he took the chance of just putting points on the board with plenty of time left on the clock. Titans defense was playing pretty well all game as well. He trusts his defense more than his offense, so his logic was that his defense would be able to stop us with his offense having enough time for one last drive to either win (if they made the FG) or tie the game and send it to OT. But of course our offense prevailed and didn't give them that chance. In a close defensive battle, he would've gotten ridiculed no matter what decision he made. They had scored a TD on a drive, then next drive had a TD called back (leaading to a different missed FG) and were again in FG range on the third consecutive drive, the offense was playing better. What were they gonna do, kick 3 straight FG's with 8 minutes left to win? There is not a good explanation other than it was a dumb decision. Hitting that FG gives him the opportunity to win with a TD drive like you said. But they still need a TD to win or tie, and it was a manageable 4th down, with 3 or 4 yards to go. 4th and 15 might be a different story, they should have been in TD mode only after the kicker missed 3.
CodeMonkey Posted October 7, 2019 Posted October 7, 2019 10 hours ago, BillsShredder83 said: My gf is from Canada, first year watching football before and she said the same damn thing to me. 'Whatd he miss from like 35'ish a few times? Why wouldn't they go for it?' Apparently he had been solid all season up to that point. If it had been good, then the thread would have been about the great decision showing confidence in his kicker.
YoloinOhio Posted October 7, 2019 Author Posted October 7, 2019 42 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said: People can bash the decision but I've seen it happen hundreds of times in the NFL and college Difference is before the FG , a TD would tie, if they made it a FG would win... Either way a TD needs to be scored and he probably honestly thought he could go down and score eventually It's a bad decision but I've seen it soooooo many times it not like it's a vrabel thing It’s not the decision of the FG in a vacuum. It’s the decision of the FG given that he had already missed 3 and this was from 53. 1
Warcodered Posted October 7, 2019 Posted October 7, 2019 31 minutes ago, CodeMonkey said: Apparently he had been solid all season up to that point. If it had been good, then the thread would have been about the great decision showing confidence in his kicker. I don't know them still losing by 4 pts probably would of negated that.
Buffalo716 Posted October 7, 2019 Posted October 7, 2019 4 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: It’s not the decision of the FG in a vacuum. It’s the decision of the FG given that he had already missed 3 and this was from 53. Not the first time I've seen it He's a pro kicker, I've never met a football coach who thought there kicker would miss 4 Straight in a game, even after it happens He's paid to correct his miss and make the next one
Recommended Posts