4th Down Decision

[newcam2012]

Wondering everyone's thoughts on McD going for the 39 yard FG into the wind? It was 4th and 3 with a few minutes on the clock. Bills were up 3 points. Arizona had all 3 of their time outs. 

 

As for myself, I was all for kicking the FG. I was pretty confident Bass would make it because he looked solid all game. Almost like his old reliable self. I felt going up 6 would be good enough. Force Arizona to get a TD. Sure it leaves the door open but it's was still a tough ask for Arizona. No doubt it would be nervous time. 

 

Making the 4th down conversation still didn't close the door on Arizona since they still had all their timeouts. Missing the conversion would have been terrible. Pretty much giving Arizona a chance to win the game and a great chance to tie it. Of course, there was always a chance the Bills could have came back and gotten a game winning FG. 

Edited September 9 by newcam2012

[T.E.]

I thought they should've gone for it, but it was clear that McDermott was playing for three, which I thought was the more egregious decision in that scenario. 

[DapperCam]

On the one hand, it felt like playing not to lose.

 

On the other hand, if we didn’t get the 1st down the game is probably going into OT.

[TFBillsfan]

I don’t get why everyone is worked up over the FG to go up by six. I question the 2nd and 3rd down play calling. IMO that’s where the scrutiny should be at. 
 

Don’t convert the 4th and 3 and IMO AZ easily ties the game. 

[Gugny]

Just now, TFBillsfan said:

I don’t get why everyone is worked up over the FG to go up by six. I question the 2nd and 3rd down play calling. IMO that’s where the scrutiny should be at. 
 

Don’t convert the 4th and 3 and IMO AZ easily ties the game. 

Exactly. 
 

That was a pathetic - and painfully typical - “play for a FG” drive. 

[Big Turk]

if it was 4th and 1, I would have preferred to go for it and McD likely would have.  4th and 3, make them have to score a TD to win by kicking the FG...Bass was kicking well all day and in pre-game so I didn't have an issue with it.

[Logic]

I thoughts Sean McDermott's explanation of it was well stated. It was clear he had a really tough time with the decision. He even said if it was 4th and 2 they would've gone for it, but 4th and 3 was a bridge too far. He rightly pointed out that even if they Bills had gone for it and converted, it wouldn't have necessarily put the game away, as the Cardinals still had all three timeouts. 

All in all, I was okay with the decision, because putting the opposing offense in a situation where they need a TD instead of a FG adds a SIGNIFICANT amount of stress and difficulty. Also, without that extra three points, that game was likely headed to overtime yesterday, as the Cards were already in field goal position at the end of the game.

I don't fault anyone who would've preferred to go for it, but I thought it was the right call in the moment.

[NewEra]

I was pissed.  I’d rather give 17 the chance to win the game rather than Bass and the defense.
 

that said, he was injured and we have no idea how injured.  If they thought the injury may have had an impact, I can understand the decision a bit more.  In hindsight-  it was the correct move.  His defense got the stop

[Udubalum07]

I agree with the 2nd and 3rd down decisions being the bigger issue. 

 

Allen completed nearly 80%of his throws give him two chances to get a first throwing and I think the odds are greatly in his favor to complete one of them. 

 

It may not have run out the clock, but it would at least have used all their time outs and put them in more of a bind.

[GASabresIUFan]

I hoped that they would have gone for it.

 

The plusses are the extra 3 forcing the Cards to score a TD and maybe a little confidence for Bass.

 

The minuses are by making the field goal, you forced Bass to kick into the wind on both the field goal and on the new kickoff which almost proved to be a disaster a second time.  Add that by making the 3 yards you probably take significantly more time off the clock and or get them to burn their TOs. All in all, I wish they had gone for it.

Edited September 9 by GASabresIUFan

[Utah John]

You can argue for or against the choice to kick the FG.  It worked out, so it supports McDermott's understanding of how well his kicker AND his defense were playing.  The kicker was solid all game, even into the wind, and the defense had had lapses all game, so a three point lead was not sufficient.

[TheWei44]

25 minutes ago, Logic said:

I thoughts Sean McDermott's explanation of it was well stated. It was clear he had a really tough time with the decision. He even said if it was 4th and 2 they would've gone for it, but 4th and 3 was a bridge too far. He rightly pointed out that even if they Bills had gone for it and converted, it wouldn't have necessarily put the game away, as the Cardinals still had all three timeouts. 

All in all, I was okay with the decision, because putting the opposing offense in a situation where they need a TD instead of a FG adds a SIGNIFICANT amount of stress and difficulty. Also, without that extra three points, that game was likely headed to overtime yesterday, as the Cards were already in field goal position at the end of the game.

I don't fault anyone who would've preferred to go for it, but I thought it was the right call in the moment.

At the time, I saw 4th and 3 on the field/live game and 4th and 2 on my phone (checking other scores during commercial, I think) - I said to my son something like "if it's really 4th and 2, maybe we'll go for it" and then saw it confirmed for sure 4th and 3 on the field.  

[Process]

4th and 1 or 2 is slam dunk go for it. 4th and a long 3 I probably still would have, but I always lean aggressive and don't think it was a terrible decision to kick. 

 

The third down play call was the much bigger issue. 

[Doc]

Going for the FG was the right decision.  The Cardinals hadn't scored a TD on offense since 2-1/2 minutes left in the 1st half.  If it had been only a yard, maybe go for it.

[mannc]

I did not like the decision, but Allen's injury could have factored into it. 

 

A team that's down by 3 on the road will almost always settle for a FG instead of trying to score a TD, whereas a team that is down by 6 of course has to try to score a TD to win the game.  If the Bills don't covert, I feel like the worst that can happen is the Cards kick a FG to tie, and in that scenario, it's likely that the Bills, who had two timeouts left, get the ball back with some time left to get the winning score, or at worst you go to OT.

[Logic]

There's a metric and a chart that regularly tracks how often NFL head coaches go for it on 4th down when they "should" (i.e. when the analytics say that it's statistically logical to do so), and McDermott consistently ranks at or near the very top.

For any of the game day decision making things that people can knock McDermott for, this -- in my opinion -- is not one of them. He's become a very good (and usually aggressive) 4th down decision maker, and I expect that to continue this year. In fact, I expect him to be even MORE aggressive on 4th down due to Bass's struggles from 50+ yards out.

[L Ron Burgundy]

I was just thinking about this.  I think going for it is the better call.

 

I also think he goes for it if it's 4th and 2 rather than 3.  

[BillsFan2313]

I was more upset about the 3rd down play call

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

I wanted them to go for it, but lived with the decision to kick.

 

what is annoying is that I bet McD makes the same decision if we were playing the chiefs, and we all know how that would end.

[BidsJr]

I knew as soon as I saw McDermott chirping into the microphone that ultra conservative mode was coming.

 

That is the far bigger issue than whatever happened on 4th down.