PDA

View Full Version : 4th and 1


Vine
12-19-2011, 11:42 PM
In retrospect, I am thinking what a stupid decision to kick the FG. Denver had a penalty, which the Patriots declined, instead, giving Denver a 4th and short situation around the Patriots 10. Absolutely should have went for the 1st down, need touchdowns to beat NE, not FG's.

Here is the thing though...Remember earlier in the season, Broncos had a similar situation, Jets game. 4th and 1 deep in opponent territory. Broncos went for it, it was a McGahee run up the middle and he was stuffed. Fox said "stupid decision of me, I'll never do that again".

Fox is too damn stupid to realize that a handoff up the middle rarely works in short yardage situations when the defense is stacking the middle in the box. Instead, put the ball in Tebow's hands. Maybe even let him pass (gasp!), ala Brady on New England's 4th and 1 situation. An opposing team would NEVER expect Denver to allow Tebow to pass in a short yardage situation, especially on 4th down. A play action, and there is bound to be an uncovered receiver for an easy pitch and catch.

Drek
12-20-2011, 03:16 AM
That decision was a microcosm of the entire game. Belichick doing everything to get the ball out of Tebow's hands and Fox/McCoy being unwitting accomplices.

When else would you see a team with a porous defense like the Pats, already gashed multiple times in the run game, give a team a 4th and 1 inside the red zone instead of making it a 3rd and 16? Belichick knew that on 3rd and 16 he was surrendering another shot at the end zone to Tebow and that was the last thing he wanted. So he used Fox's own over conservative mindset against him to help take momentum.

Atwater His Ass
12-20-2011, 03:29 AM
It was a fine decision. Not like it came anywhere close to costing us the game.

Every fan wants to go for it on 4th and short. It's rarely the right decision.

Broncbow
12-20-2011, 04:15 AM
Fox is too damn stupid

:notworthy

canadianbroncosfan
12-20-2011, 04:43 AM
In retrospect, I am thinking what a stupid decision to kick the FG. Denver had a penalty, which the Patriots declined, instead, giving Denver a 4th and short situation around the Patriots 10. Absolutely should have went for the 1st down, need touchdowns to beat NE, not FG's.

Here is the thing though...Remember earlier in the season, Broncos had a similar situation, Jets game. 4th and 1 deep in opponent territory. Broncos went for it, it was a McGahee run up the middle and he was stuffed. Fox said "stupid decision of me, I'll never do that again".

Fox is too damn stupid to realize that a handoff up the middle rarely works in short yardage situations when the defense is stacking the middle in the box. Instead, put the ball in Tebow's hands. Maybe even let him pass (gasp!), ala Brady on New England's 4th and 1 situation. An opposing team would NEVER expect Denver to allow Tebow to pass in a short yardage situation, especially on 4th down. A play action, and there is bound to be an uncovered receiver for an easy pitch and catch.

I like this in theory but it's not just Fox calling plays, McCoy is still our OC and I think that's a little to "out of the box" for his thinking.

vancejohnson82
12-20-2011, 05:29 AM
classic case of Belichek knowing exactly what the guy on the other sideline is going to do...he was absolutely positive that Fox would kick that field goal, thats why he declined the penalty. He basically put his nuts on the table and made Fox sit down to pee

rbackfactory80
12-20-2011, 05:53 AM
I spoke on this several times yesterday. Fox has to be willing to take chances especially against teams like the Pats. We go up by 13 there and some pressure is added to start chucking the ball all over the yard for NE.

To defend Fox, I will say we had just made a stop so maybe he felt we would be able to hold the Pats more frequently. That stop had less to do with our defense than Brady just needing to settle down and get into the rhythm of the game though.

Spider
12-20-2011, 06:03 AM
never leave points on the field , thats a no brainer , we can second guess every play call , fact is turning the ball over 3 consecutive times was the final nail on the crosss.... err coffin

Vine
12-20-2011, 06:04 AM
That decision was a microcosm of the entire game. Belichick doing everything to get the ball out of Tebow's hands and Fox/McCoy being unwitting accomplices.

When else would you see a team with a porous defense like the Pats, already gashed multiple times in the run game, give a team a 4th and 1 inside the red zone instead of making it a 3rd and 16? Belichick knew that on 3rd and 16 he was surrendering another shot at the end zone to Tebow and that was the last thing he wanted. So he used Fox's own over conservative mindset against him to help take momentum.


Excellent reply. Sums up my feelings perfectly. Fox just got outcoached plain and simple. But then again, Bill Belichick is Bill Belichick and John Fox is John Fox.

Vine
12-20-2011, 06:06 AM
never leave points on the field , thats a no brainer , we can second guess every play call , fact is turning the ball over 3 consecutive times was the final nail on the crosss.... err coffin

See, this is what I don't get about this type of reply. A FG Attempt is not automatic points on the board.

Spider
12-20-2011, 06:07 AM
Excellent reply. Sums up my feelings perfectly. Fox just got outcoached plain and simple. But then again, Bill Belichick is Bill Belichick and John Fox is John Fox.

really ? are you really going there?

Spider
12-20-2011, 06:08 AM
See, this is what I don't get about this type of reply. A FG Attempt is not automatic points on the board.

Nothing in football is automatic , Not a dayum thing , even going for it on 4 th and 1

Vine
12-20-2011, 06:09 AM
really ? are you really going there?

Yes. I don't think John Fox is done an overall good job with the Broncos. The good things he has done with the defense and special teams is grossly outweighed by the mishandling of Tim Tebow, from claiming that Orton "gave them a better chance to win" to the handling of Tim Tebow on and off the field since going with him in week 5.

Vine
12-20-2011, 06:10 AM
Nothing in football is automatic , Not a dayum thing , even going for it on 4 th and 1

Exactly right. So you would go with a not-automatic that could lead to 3 points or the not-automatic that could lead to 7 points?

barryr
12-20-2011, 06:12 AM
I think most knew the Broncos were going to have to score a lot to win this game considering how the defense has played against good offense this year. So going for it probably would be the right move, but Fox is a conservative, defensive-minded type of coach, so someone on staff would have to do a great sell job to get him to take chances.

Phil Simms had it right where he stated Fox likes what he has right now. An offense that runs the majority of the time and a QB who does not turn it over much. Which is making me wonder now just how creative will they be with Tebow next year.

Spider
12-20-2011, 06:16 AM
Exactly right. So you would go with a not-automatic that could lead to 3 points or the not-automatic that could lead to 7 points?

I want you to prove to me , that even if we get the 1 st down , we get 7 points .....cant wait to hear this

lolcopter
12-20-2011, 06:49 AM
classic case of Belichek knowing exactly what the guy on the other sideline is going to do...he was absolutely positive that Fox would kick that field goal, thats why he declined the penalty. He basically put his nuts on the table and made Fox sit down to pee

:golfclap:

Broncbow
12-20-2011, 07:01 AM
Yes. I don't think John Fox is done an overall good job with the Broncos. The good things he has done with the defense and special teams is grossly outweighed by the mishandling of Tim Tebow, from claiming that Orton "gave them a better chance to win" to the handling of Tim Tebow on and off the field since going with him in week 5.

Tebow was the leading rusher, passer, and scorer against the Patriots. Allowing him less than 25 yards of output in the 2nd and 3rd quarter is retarded. Elway and Fox are retarded.

Allowing them to get away with sabotaging Tebow is retarded.

Broncbow
12-20-2011, 07:04 AM
Phil Simms had it right where he stated Fox likes what he has right now. An offense that runs the majority of the time and a QB who does not turn it over much. Which is making me wonder now just how creative will they be with Tebow next year.

Elway could not have hired a better coach to keep Tebow underwraps. Why in the hell are these two guys not fired yet? These Anti-Tebow clowns need to be run out of town.

oubronco
12-20-2011, 07:21 AM
Too early in the game, take the points

houghtam
12-20-2011, 07:30 AM
It was a fine decision. Not like it came anywhere close to costing us the game.

Every fan wants to go for it on 4th and short. It's rarely the right decision.

This.

This is why coaching in the NFL is such a ridiculously hard job. If he'd have gone for it and not made it, there would be legions of fans screaming "WHY NOT TAKE THE AUTOMATIC POINTS THAT COULD HAVE TURNED THE MOMENTUM ROBBLE ROBBLE ROBBLE!!!11!1!11!one!"

Get over yourself. It was the right decision at the right time. Turnovers cost us the game, and this decision had zero effect on the game.

Powderaddict
12-20-2011, 07:30 AM
I would have liked for the Broncos to go for it.

But really, as others have said, the turnovers really make it a moot point. Not going for it isn't what lost the game, 3 turnovers in the 2nd quarter did.

Vine
12-20-2011, 07:36 AM
I want you to prove to me , that even if we get the 1 st down , we get 7 points .....cant wait to hear this

Nothing is automatic, but a first down keeps the hope 7 points becomes reality, a FG automatically kills any hope of getting 7 points on that possession.

houghtam
12-20-2011, 07:38 AM
We should never kick field goals or punt. We shouldn't even pass. RUSHING TD OR BUST.

broncocalijohn
12-20-2011, 07:41 AM
I want you to prove to me , that even if we get the 1 st down , we get 7 points .....cant wait to hear this

Spider must have taken his vitamins today because he has the point. The 7 or 4th and one is not guaranteed and at that early point of the game, the 3 points puts a ton of pressure on the Pats. At that time, kick the field goal.

Vine
12-20-2011, 07:52 AM
Why does the part of the game (what quarter or half) have to do with deciding whether to go for the first down or not?

If there are 3 seconds left, and you are down by 1, 2, or 3, then kick the FG. In all most other situations, go for the first down.

Play to win the game. Not to not lose the game!

houghtam
12-20-2011, 07:55 AM
Why does the part of the game (what quarter or half) have to do with deciding whether to go for the first down or not?

If there are 3 seconds left, and you are down by 1, 2, or 3, then kick the FG. In all most other situations, go for the first down.

Play to win the game. Not to not lose the game!

Go play Madden, child. The men are talking football.

broncocalijohn
12-20-2011, 07:55 AM
Why does the part of the game (what quarter or half) half to do with deciding whether to go for the first down or not?

If there are 3 seconds left, and you are down by 1, 2, or 3, then kick the FG. In all most other situations, go for the first down.

Play to win the game. Not to not lose the game!

We were winning the game and doing it pretty nicely too! With the almost guaranteed field goal of 3 points, the momentum was still there and we were up by more than 2 scores. Time of the game has a lot to do with the decision.

DBroncos4life
12-20-2011, 08:04 AM
Didn't he take points off the board against the Raiders and we lost? Trolls are going to troll.

Vine
12-20-2011, 08:04 AM
We were winning the game and doing it pretty nicely too! With the almost guaranteed field goal of 3 points, the momentum was still there and we were up by more than 2 scores. Time of the game has a lot to do with the decision.

Denver was up 13-7 on the 4th and 1. So this is only a 1 score game, not 2 or more than 2 as you stated. Please get your facts straight when trying to make your argument.

houghtam
12-20-2011, 08:07 AM
Denver was up 13-7 on the 4th and 1. So this is only a 1 score game, not 2 or more than 2 as you stated. Please get your facts straight when trying to make your argument.

Derp. He's saying Denver was up 13-7 (one score), and kicking the field goal makes it 16-7 (two scores).

I am sorry the public education system in America has failed you.

Vine
12-20-2011, 08:07 AM
Bottom line:

3's might be good enough against teams that Denver has played up to, the NE game.

3's won't be good enough against NE. Get as many 7's as reasonably possible.

What I mean by reasonably possible is this: 4th and 3 or more, kick the FG, 4th and 2 or less, go for the first down and ultimately, the touchdown.

Vine
12-20-2011, 08:08 AM
Derp. He's saying Denver was up 13-7 (one score), and kicking the field goal makes it 16-7 (two scores).

I am sorry the public education system in America has failed you.

Ok fine then, but he did say more than 2 scores, did he not?

houghtam
12-20-2011, 08:10 AM
Ok fine then, but he did say more than 2 scores, did he not?

Aaaaand ignored.

This list is filling up pretty fast nowadays.

DBroncos4life
12-20-2011, 08:12 AM
Aaaaand ignored.

This list is filling up pretty fast nowadays.

Well atleast you don't have to worry about explaining to your kids what boobs are and why they come in different sizes! Hilarious!

houghtam
12-20-2011, 08:19 AM
Well atleast you don't have to worry about explaining to your kids what boobs are and why they come in different sizes! Hilarious!

Don't forget my boss. Cuz ya know, I can't go five minutes at work without checking the message board.

vancejohnson82
12-20-2011, 08:19 AM
was listening to an NY sports talk show today and theey were talking about how Harbaugh is a lock for the Coach of the Year award.

They than said that Kubiak and Fox should be mentioned as well, but won't have a shot.

Funny that our coach is getting some respect from everyone BUT the fans. BroncBw calls a guy who is being praised for his work this year retarded...which might make him (fill in the blank)

Shotgun Willie
12-20-2011, 08:19 AM
Turnovers cost us the game, and this decision had zero effect on the game.

That's not entirely true. Zero effect? What if the Broncos went for it, got the first, and then a few plays later, scored a TD. Not only would the score have been completely different, but we would've held the ball longer, rested our defense more, and in all reality used up another two minutes or so on the clock. And why would that two minutes be important, you ask? Well, in the last two minutes of the first half, the Pats scored a TD, we fumbled a punt, and the Pats recovered and kicked a fg. If we chew up more clock, there's a good chance that sequence never happens. That's a potential 14 point swing (difference in our field goal vs a TD if we go for it, and 10 less pts for the Pats). Plenty to change the entire complexion of the game.

houghtam
12-20-2011, 08:23 AM
That's not entirely true. Zero effect? What if the Broncos went for it, got the first, and then a few plays later, scored a TD. Not only would the score have been completely different, but we would've held the ball longer, rested our defense more, and in all reality used up another two minutes or so on the clock. And why would that two minutes be important, you ask? Well, in the last two minutes of the first half, the Pats scored a TD, we fumbled a punt, and the Pats recovered and kicked a fg. If we chew up more clock, there's a good chance that sequence never happens. That's a potential 14 point swing (difference in our field goal vs a TD if we go for it, and 10 less pts for the Pats). Plenty to change the entire complexion of the game.

So we're blaming the awful 2nd quarter on a decision to take (more than likely) 3 points instead of (possibly) 7 now? That's rich. I guess it's much easier to blame it on not playing Maddenball than not playing defense, special teams or protecting the ball.

ClamChowdah
12-20-2011, 08:30 AM
You have to kick the fg, the Patriots defense has actually been good on short yardage this year when the heavy package comes in, the redzone has been a strength and making people kick FG's which is why we're 32nd in defense but 14th in points, Fox isn't an idiot, it is possible to be stuffed we do still have Vince Wilfork.

The Patriots also threw the ball on 4th down and happen to have a guy called Tom Brady as the QB, its alot easier decision to make for BB.

Remember the heat BB got for this? 4th and 2 at our own 28 yard line, going for it can also backfire, 11:45 in, we lost this game 35-34.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BrarlFVekO8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

SpringStein
12-20-2011, 08:35 AM
Meanwhile Raiders fans are unhappy that the team left three on the board by going for it on 4th and 1, and failing, in the first quarter. Then losing by two.

go_broncos
12-20-2011, 08:38 AM
No one knows what will happen..We might not even get 3 points.
It's time to move on.

Shotgun Willie
12-20-2011, 08:43 AM
So we're blaming the awful 2nd quarter on a decision to take (more than likely) 3 points instead of (possibly) 7 now? That's rich. I guess it's much easier to blame it on not playing Maddenball than not playing defense, special teams or protecting the ball.

What?!? Please, please learn to read and think about what you read before jumping to bizarre conclusions based off what others may have said and mixing it with what I said. My post was addressing one thing and one thing alone and wasn't blaming anyone or it for anything that happened afterwards. I didn't even say that I thought the wrong decision was made.

I'll try again for those in the cheap seats.

You made the VERY decisive statement that that decision to go for it or not would change NOTHING that happened after it. I disagree. It had the potential to change quite a bit, actually. Had they possessed the ball for even another 1:30 alone (easily do-able if they got the first there) and still ended up having to kick a field goal, the score wouldn't have changed right away, but the Pats wouldn't have had time to do everything after that the same way and score the 10 pts they did at the end of the 2nd quarter. That's all.

Again, I'm not saying they made the wrong decision to kick the fg there. I'm just saying it's crazy to think NOTHING could change after that if a different decision is made. A lot could've changed.

houghtam
12-20-2011, 08:44 AM
No one knows what will happen..We might not even get 3 points.
It's time to move on.

Yup.

I can only imagine the backlash for this gem of a press conference:

"Coach Fox, can you explain your decision to go for it on 4th down in the 2nd quarter?"

"Well, I figured we would need to run off that extra 2 minutes just in case our defense was going to give up a 12 play, 81 yard drive, then our running back fumbles on the first play of the next drive, leading to a Patriots field goal on a short field, then Tebow fumbles leading to another Patriots touchdown, then our offense goes three and out, but our defense forces a three and out, but then our dumbass punt returner muffs the punt which leads to another Patriots field goal before the half.

That is why I went for it on 4th down."

broncocalijohn
12-20-2011, 08:47 AM
Denver was up 13-7 on the 4th and 1. So this is only a 1 score game, not 2 or more than 2 as you stated. Please get your facts straight when trying to make your argument.

You dip****, the 3 points makes it a two score game. Even a TD is still a two score game. You going to get technical with "more than two"? It is two...TWO SCORES! As a poster above you mentioned, we actually took points off the board and not only didnt score the td, missed the long (and windy) field goal attempt. While we had not made the FG yet, it was about the length of a 28 yarder. We score 3, we are up by 2 scores.....Get it?

Shotgun Willie
12-20-2011, 08:47 AM
Yup.

I can only imagine the backlash for this gem of a press conference:

"Coach Fox, can you explain your decision to go for it on 4th down in the 2nd quarter?"


I can only imagine the backlash for this gem of a press conference:

"Coach Fox, can you explain your decision to go for it on 4th down in the 2nd quarter?"

"Well, I was told that the decision would have no effect on the the game, so what difference would it make if I went for it or kicked the field goal?"

Spider
12-20-2011, 08:49 AM
Denver was up 13-7 on the 4th and 1. So this is only a 1 score game, not 2 or more than 2 as you stated. Please get your facts straight when trying to make your argument.

you got so much to lean bout this game

peacepipe
12-20-2011, 08:53 AM
who cares! instead of losing by 18 points we would have lost by 14 points.

broncocalijohn
12-20-2011, 08:54 AM
I can only imagine the backlash for this gem of a press conference:

"Coach Fox, can you explain your decision to go for it on 4th down in the 2nd quarter?"

"Well, I was told that the decision would have no effect on the the game, so what difference would it make if I went for it or kicked the field goal?"

You are playing the "I know the facts since the game is over" and then will put absurd comments and reasoning behind it. You really think our coach and any other at that time is thinking about, "Hey, we make it on 4th but then have to kick a field goal and burn 1:30 off the clock." You really think the coaches would actually think of something so small and meaningless at that time of the game? We just drove down to the 7 yard line and the defense needed more rest when we are at the beginning and not the end of the game? Whatsa matta wif you?

Shotgun Willie
12-20-2011, 08:56 AM
who cares! instead of losing by 18 points we would have lost by 14 points.

If the decision was made in the last minute of the game.....or the game was played in a vacuum where every decision after that one had to stay the same, then sure. But it didn't. Everything that occurred after it would've been affected, one way or the other.

Shotgun Willie
12-20-2011, 08:56 AM
You are playing the "I know the facts since the game is over" and then will put absurd comments and reasoning behind it. You really think our coach and any other at that time is thinking about, "Hey, we make it on 4th but then have to kick a field goal and burn 1:30 off the clock." You really think the coaches would actually think of something so small and meaningless at that time of the game? We just drove down to the 7 yard line and the defense needed more rest when we are at the beginning and not the end of the game? Whatsa matta wif you?

This is not at all what I'm saying. You couldn't be misreading my post more.

I'm not saying he should've done one thing over the other. I'm not giving Fox knowledge of the future. He made the right textbook call. I'm not saying he didn't.

Again, all I'm saying is that decision had an effect on the rest of the game. It did. The events that played out at the end of the 2nd quarter probably wouldn't have happened if the Broncos made a different call on that 4th down play. Obviously they'd have no way of knowing it at the time and obviously they couldn't use it in their decision making there. I'm just saying that things would've been different.

Spider
12-20-2011, 08:57 AM
You have to kick the fg, the Patriots defense has actually been good on short yardage this year when the heavy package comes in, the redzone has been a strength and making people kick FG's which is why we're 32nd in defense but 14th in points, Fox isn't an idiot, it is possible to be stuffed we do still have Vince Wilfork.

The Patriots also threw the ball on 4th down and happen to have a guy called Tom Brady as the QB, its alot easier decision to make for BB.

Remember the heat BB got for this? 4th and 2 at our own 28 yard line, going for it can also backfire, 11:45 in, we lost this game 35-34.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BrarlFVekO8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

does your man crush know you are talking to strangers on a Message board

peacepipe
12-20-2011, 09:03 AM
If the decision was made in the last minute of the game.....or the game was played in a vacuum where every decision after that one had to stay the same, then sure. But it didn't. Everything that occurred after it would've been affected, one way or the other.I see what you're saying but brady or belichek weren't going to panic & change anything if we scored a TD. They changed from a 4-3 to 3-4 defense after the 1st qtr after the yds denver put up running the ball. any changes made would've happened regardless of wether we scored a td or not.

ScottXray
12-20-2011, 09:05 AM
Hindsight is always 20-20. Yes if we had gone for it it might have had a positive effect on the game and changed the outcome ( at least somewhat) for the positive. And if we had been stuffed the game might have turned out even worse.

By not taking the penalty and giving Tebow another 3rd down chance it also was Bellicheck ( just about) conceding the 3 points would happen and we would go up 2 scores anyway. Prater has been almost automatic inside 40 and outside 50.

I do agree if Fox HAD gone for it and we got 7 points on that drive then Bellicheck would have been questioning whether he had analysed Fox/McCoys tendencies correctly. And it might have thrown a little turmoil into their offensive play calling and they maybe would have pressed the pass a bit more. Of course the way that our secondary played that might have also meant an even worse result.

Ifs and Buts . Ifs and Buts.

It didn't happen, and thats the only Truth we know.

Shotgun Willie
12-20-2011, 09:07 AM
I see what you're saying but brady or belichek weren't going to panic & change anything if we scored a TD. They changed from a 4-3 to 3-4 defense after the 1st qtr after the yds denver put up running the ball. any changes made would've happened regardless of wether we scored a td or not.

I'm talking more on their offensive side than defensive side. Technically, if they had 2-3 less minutes to work with in the first half (because of our holding the ball for a few more plays instead of kicking the fg), and didn't change their playcalling at all, then they would've scored 10 fewer points in that first half. And we could've gone into the half with the lead, which would've no doubt changed our 2nd half playcalling as well.

Broncbow
12-20-2011, 09:22 AM
Again, all I'm saying is that decision had an effect on the rest of the game. It did. The events that played out at the end of the 2nd quarter probably wouldn't have happened if the Broncos made a different call on that 4th down play. Obviously they'd have no way of knowing it at the time and obviously they couldn't use it in their decision making there. I'm just saying that things would've been different.

4th and one Tebow throws a TD pass and the team takes the momentum to victory. Sounds great.

But what did we get, a leash on Tebow throughout the game until the 4th when it was way too late Elway or the high way?

vancejohnson82
12-20-2011, 09:24 AM
4th and one Tebow throws a TD pass and the team takes the momentum to victory. Sounds great.

But what did we get, a leash on Tebow throughout the game until the 4th when it was way too late Elway or the high way?

your posts give me diarrhea

Broncbow
12-20-2011, 09:34 AM
Explosive? Sounds to me like your misdiagnosing the result of the game.
http://www.methodsofhealing.com/Healing_Conditions/files/2010/05/rotavirus-diarrhea.jpg

Vine
12-20-2011, 09:39 AM
You dip****, the 3 points makes it a two score game. Even a TD is still a two score game. You going to get technical with "more than two"? It is two...TWO SCORES! As a poster above you mentioned, we actually took points off the board and not only didnt score the td, missed the long (and windy) field goal attempt. While we had not made the FG yet, it was about the length of a 28 yarder. We score 3, we are up by 2 scores.....Get it?

Yeah, I get it. If it is late in the game, kick the FG. A 2 score lead late has a lot more meaning than early in the game. For this reason alone, it makes sense to go for the first down early, and hopefully a touchdown.

DBroncos4life
12-20-2011, 09:51 AM
Yeah, I get it. If it is late in the game, kick the FG. A 2 score lead late has a lot more meaning than early in the game. For this reason alone, it makes sense to go for the first down early, and hopefully a touchdown.


1st and 2 at TEN 2
K.Orton pass incomplete short right to D.Fells.
2nd and 2 at TEN 2
W.McGahee up the middle to TEN 2 for no gain (W.Witherspoon; S.Marks).
3rd and 2 at TEN 2
W.McGahee left tackle to TEN 1 for 1 yard (S.Marks; B.Ruud).
Timeout #2 by DEN at 13:34.
4th and 1 at TEN 1
W.McGahee up the middle to TEN 1 for no gain (D.Morgan).


Points off the board we lose by 3 points. This happened in the 4th Q.

broncosteven
12-20-2011, 09:56 AM
In retrospect, I am thinking what a stupid decision to kick the FG. Denver had a penalty, which the Patriots declined, instead, giving Denver a 4th and short situation around the Patriots 10. Absolutely should have went for the 1st down, need touchdowns to beat NE, not FG's.

Here is the thing though...Remember earlier in the season, Broncos had a similar situation, Jets game. 4th and 1 deep in opponent territory. Broncos went for it, it was a McGahee run up the middle and he was stuffed. Fox said "stupid decision of me, I'll never do that again".

Fox is too damn stupid to realize that a handoff up the middle rarely works in short yardage situations when the defense is stacking the middle in the box. Instead, put the ball in Tebow's hands. Maybe even let him pass (gasp!), ala Brady on New England's 4th and 1 situation. An opposing team would NEVER expect Denver to allow Tebow to pass in a short yardage situation, especially on 4th down. A play action, and there is bound to be an uncovered receiver for an easy pitch and catch.

You need points everytime you have the ball vs Belly. Not picking up the 3 would have been worse.

I think the big issue was the rookies that we started in the secondary against a HOF QB. We (those of us old enough or here before a certain Gator player) have seen what happens starting a rookies vs Manning.

broncocalijohn
12-20-2011, 11:05 AM
Yeah, I get it. If it is late in the game, kick the FG. A 2 score lead late has a lot more meaning than early in the game. For this reason alone, it makes sense to go for the first down early, and hopefully a touchdown.

My reasoning for going for the 3 points is we were now 3 for 3 on drives and we just had them punt the ball. Momentum was way on our side and no need to give them any hope.

Vine
12-20-2011, 11:15 AM
1st and 2 at TEN 2
K.Orton pass incomplete short right to D.Fells.
2nd and 2 at TEN 2
W.McGahee up the middle to TEN 2 for no gain (W.Witherspoon; S.Marks).
3rd and 2 at TEN 2
W.McGahee left tackle to TEN 1 for 1 yard (S.Marks; B.Ruud).
Timeout #2 by DEN at 13:34.
4th and 1 at TEN 1
W.McGahee up the middle to TEN 1 for no gain (D.Morgan).


Points off the board we lose by 3 points. This happened in the 4th Q.


Ridiculous. You are honestly using a series involving ORTON to make your argument? Wow.

Spider
12-20-2011, 11:18 AM
Ridiculous. You are honestly using a series involving ORTON to make your argument? Wow.

How about Brady ? going for it on 4 th and 2 not making it and losing by 2 points does that count ?

Vine
12-20-2011, 11:21 AM
How about Brady ? going for it on 4 th and 2 not making it and losing by 2 points does that count ?

Sure that counts. Belly was playing to win, instead of playing not to lose.

I would rather lose a game with aggressive playcalling, than with conservative playcalling.

Aggressive playcalling wins games 75% of the time.

Conservative playcalling wins games 40% of the time.

Spider
12-20-2011, 11:25 AM
Sure that counts. Belly was playing to win, instead of playing not to lose.

I would rather lose a game with aggressive playcalling, than with conservative playcalling.

Aggressive playcalling wins games 75% of the time.

Conservative playcalling wins games 40% of the time.

how far was we behind ?

vancejohnson82
12-20-2011, 11:28 AM
Sure that counts. Belly was playing to win, instead of playing not to lose.

I would rather lose a game with aggressive playcalling, than with conservative playcalling.

Aggressive playcalling wins games 75% of the time.

Conservative playcalling wins games 40% of the time.

I don't really have a definitive opinion one way or the other about this...but where did you get these stats?

DBroncos4life
12-20-2011, 11:29 AM
Ridiculous. You are honestly using a series involving ORTON to make your argument? Wow.

Are you a ****ing retard? I'm using a game from this ****ing year when we went for it on 4th and one and didn't take the points AND WE ****ING LOST!!!!

Vine
12-20-2011, 11:54 AM
I don't really have a definitive opinion one way or the other about this...but where did you get these stats?

My perceptions of watching football ever since I can remember (about the last 25 years or so).

Vine
12-20-2011, 11:56 AM
Are you a ****ing retard? I'm using a game from this ****ing year when we went for it on 4th and one and didn't take the points AND WE ****ING LOST!!!!

Sorry to break it to you, but Kyle Orton is married.

vancejohnson82
12-20-2011, 11:57 AM
My perceptions of watching football ever since I can remember (about the last 25 years or so).

hmmmm.....ok...interesting approach

Spider
12-20-2011, 11:58 AM
Sorry to break it to you, but Kyle Orton is married.

Hey just cause Tebow isnt married and you still have a shot to sniff his manhood , doesnt give you the right to make fun of others .......

Spider
12-20-2011, 11:59 AM
My perceptions of watching football ever since I can remember (about the last 25 years or so).

Canadian ball doesnt count

DBroncos4life
12-20-2011, 11:59 AM
My perceptions of watching football ever since I can remember (about the last 25 years or so).

73% of all statistics are made up on the spot. Hilarious!

DBroncos4life
12-20-2011, 12:07 PM
Sorry to break it to you, but Kyle Orton is married.

Again retard, we kick that FG we go up 17 to 10. The Titans took over on downs and drove down the field for the winning TD. Even if they scored after the kick off we drove down the field and got into FG range. We could have and should have won that game. We played for the win and lost. Right now with that win we could be in the PLAYOFFS already. I don't care if it was Orton or Tebow as the QB. That is NOT the point!!! Fox played your made up ODDS and somehow lost the game for us.

AGAIN this has nothing to do with Orton you dumb mother ****er! It has everything about Fox playing for the win and not taking points already this year and it cost us A GAME!!!

Vine
12-20-2011, 12:14 PM
I enjoy conversing back and forth with fellow fans, but the insults really do get tiresome.

Shotgun Willie
12-20-2011, 12:29 PM
Again retard, we kick that FG we go up 17 to 10. The Titans took over on downs and drove down the field for the winning TD. Even if they scored after the kick off we drove down the field and got into FG range. We could have and should have won that game.

Ummmm, what?!?

After that failed 4th down, we punted on our next possession from our own side of the field and the next time we got the ball, we stalled at their 39 (before the INT). I love Prater as much as the next guy, but let's not pretend that a 57 yard field goal (in Tennessee, not Mile High even) is some sort of gimme kick. It's not.

Vine
12-20-2011, 12:31 PM
Ummmm, what?!?

After that failed 4th down, we punted on our next possession from our own side of the field and the next time we got the ball, we stalled at their 39 (before the INT). I love Prater as much as the next guy, but let's not pretend that a 57 yard field goal (in Tennessee, not Mile High even) is some sort of gimme kick. It's not.

Good point, and I would honestly be up 14-10 with our defense on the field on their own 1 foot line, then be up 17-10 and kicking off. And this is the WORST case scenario (not converting the 4th down into a TD). Best case scenario is a 21-10 game.

Play to win the ****ING game.

Boobs McGee
12-20-2011, 12:32 PM
You need points everytime you have the ball vs Belly. Not picking up the 3 would have been worse.

I think the big issue was the rookies that we started in the secondary against a HOF QB. We (those of us old enough or here before a certain Gator player) have seen what happens starting a rookies vs Manning.

aaaaand once again, **** you roc alexander !

DBroncos4life
12-20-2011, 12:41 PM
Good point, and I would honestly be up 14-10 with our defense on the field on their own 1 foot line, then be up 17-10 and kicking off. And this is the WORST case scenario (not converting the 4th down into a TD). Best case scenario is a 21-10 game.

Play to win the ****ING game.

We did and we lost.

vancejohnson82
12-20-2011, 01:06 PM
aaaaand once again, **** you roc alexander !

hahaha...he is mentioned more on this board than in his own mother's conversations

Drek
12-20-2011, 01:52 PM
Excellent reply. Sums up my feelings perfectly. Fox just got outcoached plain and simple. But then again, Bill Belichick is Bill Belichick and John Fox is John Fox.

I don't view it quite like that. I see it more as "Bill Belichick is a decade long staple with the Pats who knows his team inside and out, and will always bet on Brady outscoring a team kicking FGs versus this year's defense stopping someone with Tebow's play making ability. Meanwhile John Fox if a guy new to this team, newer to Tebow as his QB, and is very unsure of how to win games without his defense putting the clamps on the opposition."

John Fox will find more faith in Tebow's play making ability given time. He shouldn't be crucified for it so soon into his tenure. But it is worth recognizing that Bill Belichick, a defensive mastermind who always seems a step or two ahead of his competition, apparently sees Tim Tebow with a 3rd and 16 inside the 30 yard line as a bigger threat than just surrendering the 3 points.

If you read between the lines that is a bold statement about Tebow made by Belichick, and one that Fox hasn't fully come to the realization of himself.

Atwater His Ass
12-20-2011, 01:59 PM
You're reading too much into it. It's more a reflection on knowing Fox will kick the FG then being scared of Tebow.

I mean if you know Fox will kick the FG, it doesn't make sense at all to give Denver another shot at picking up the first down regardless of who the QB is, even if it's a thrid and long. The FG was a 26 yarder, so moving us back by accepting the penalty doesn't take us out of FG range either so what would have been the point of accepting the penalty?

CEH
12-20-2011, 02:14 PM
I have no problem taking the points. Look at KC kicking FGs against Green Bay . Those came in handy to beat GB. GB should have put up 40 on KC correct so they should have also gone for it on 4th down correct

TD4HOF
12-20-2011, 03:55 PM
An earlier poster mentioned the Tennessee game. I went bonkers then not grabbing the 3. It was a horrendous call and might've cost us a game. The bright side, of course, being that 2-3 wouldn't have been enough to boot Orton.

Drek
12-20-2011, 04:17 PM
You're reading too much into it. It's more a reflection on knowing Fox will kick the FG then being scared of Tebow.

I mean if you know Fox will kick the FG, it doesn't make sense at all to give Denver another shot at picking up the first down regardless of who the QB is, even if it's a thrid and long. The FG was a 26 yarder, so moving us back by accepting the penalty doesn't take us out of FG range either so what would have been the point of accepting the penalty?

It was a 26 yarder and Belichick gave up a 15 yard swing. You think a 41 yarder is a freebie? Belichick could have taken us out of chip shot range by accepting the penalty and stopping us on a 3rd and 16. Assuming his D can give up less than 15 yards he's at least slightly better off. If they force an incomplete pass, turnover, or sack they're significantly better off as the percentage on Prater making the kick goes down significantly. Instead of taking that chance for improvement with the only risk being giving up >16 yards on a single down he chose to concede a chip shot FG.

errand
12-20-2011, 04:59 PM
See, this is what I don't get about this type of reply. A FG Attempt is not automatic points on the board.

I'm sure if you play the percentages you will find converting a field goal from that distance is a lot higher than converting fourth and 1... and even if you convert the first down it still does not guarantee you any points either

Vine
12-20-2011, 05:05 PM
I'm sure if you play the percentages you will find converting a field goal from that distance is a lot higher than converting fourth and 1... and even if you convert the first down it still does not guarantee you any points either

You make good points here, but it don't change how I feel. I just don't like kicking short FG's in 4th and short situations against a high scoring team

barryr
12-20-2011, 05:32 PM
If percentages are higher for your team to convert a field goal than converting a 4th and 1, then you have problems in your short yardage offense to say the least and you won't go far if that is the case.

Of course teams stupidly handing the ball off to a RB about 5 yards back from the LOS when the defense has 8 guys inside where you have maybe 6 blockers doesn't help either and yet so many teams try this and fail a lot more than a field goal for sure.

Vine
12-20-2011, 05:48 PM
If percentages are higher for your team to convert a field goal than converting a 4th and 1, then you have problems in your short yardage offense to say the least and you won't go far if that is the case.

Of course teams stupidly handing the ball off to a RB about 5 yards back from the LOS when the defense has 8 guys inside where you have maybe 6 blockers doesn't help either and yet so many teams try this and fail a lot more than a field goal for sure.

This

Vine
12-20-2011, 06:02 PM
http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/09/4th-down-study-part-1.html

A very challenging read for the average person, but this article is apple pie for a statistical junkie.

Basically, the article states "Go for it!" on 4th and 1 situations.

broncosteven
12-20-2011, 06:22 PM
http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/09/4th-down-study-part-1.html

A very challenging read for the average person, but this article is apple pie for a statistical junkie.

Basically, the article states "Go for it!" on 4th and 1 situations.

I am guessing this is why Mike Smith went for it in OT essentially giving NO the game when they didn't convert? Didn't work out for them did it?

DBroncos4life
12-20-2011, 06:30 PM
I am guessing this is why Mike Smith went for it in OT essentially giving NO the game when they didn't convert? Didn't work out for them did it?

I bet you will find a bunch of out of work coaches if they followed crap like that. Hilarious!

Atwater His Ass
12-20-2011, 06:41 PM
It was a 26 yarder and Belichick gave up a 15 yard swing. You think a 41 yarder is a freebie? Belichick could have taken us out of chip shot range by accepting the penalty and stopping us on a 3rd and 16. Assuming his D can give up less than 15 yards he's at least slightly better off. If they force an incomplete pass, turnover, or sack they're significantly better off as the percentage on Prater making the kick goes down significantly. Instead of taking that chance for improvement with the only risk being giving up >16 yards on a single down he chose to concede a chip shot FG.

Not worth the risk of a big play. Why give us another shot at the first down?

Belichick and Fox both made the right calls, given the circumstances at the time.

strafen
12-20-2011, 06:58 PM
I spoke on this several times yesterday. Fox has to be willing to take chances especially against teams like the Pats. We go up by 13 there and some pressure is added to start chucking the ball all over the yard for NE.

To defend Fox, I will say we had just made a stop so maybe he felt we would be able to hold the Pats more frequently. That stop had less to do with our defense than Brady just needing to settle down and get into the rhythm of the game though.

I wanted them to go for it.
That would've been huge had we converted and scored.
Like it was said, you'd need more than fg's to beat NE...

DBroncos4life
12-20-2011, 06:58 PM
I like how this guy this picking up one yard in the NFL is so easy. If its so easy why do more coaches punt the ball or kick the FG? Maybe they should look on the interwebz instead of using all those years of coaching experience to see how easy it is ROFL!

broncocalijohn
12-20-2011, 11:15 PM
Whatever the reason DBroncos, Vine at least put a good topic to discuss. Even though I called him a dip****, I should realize that not everyone will agree and it brings out (normally) the best in debating. For that, I give Vine :thumbs: