PDA

View Full Version : Why running the ball on 3rd and 7 was the right call and why this forum is retarded.


Willynowei
01-14-2013, 09:25 AM
Seriously i remember coming to the mane because the team forum at denverbroncos.com was full of retards that don't know a thing about football, well now i'm not sure this place is significantly better, considering all i hear is that we should have passed the ball on third and long with 1:20 left.

Here's why all of you are dead wrong.

1.) Chance of conversion is EXTREMELY LOW:

The highest conversion rate of 3rd downs in the entire NFL is New England at an impressive 48%. That's including 3rd and 1's, 3rd and 2's, 3rd and 3's. The Actual likelihood of converting a 3rd and 7 with the best offense in the NFL is way way way below 50%.

2.) Field position and Time:

40 seconds left, 0 time outs, 80 yards: This is what the offense hands the defense.

When exactly 80 seconds are left on the clock, 40 seconds equates to 50% of the time left, when you sit nearly at mid field, your punt has an extremely high chance of pinning the opponent inside their 20.

so Here's what you get by running off 40 seconds.

Scenario A: Opposing offense has 80 seconds: If each play takes 10 seconds on average to run, they can cover 60 yards in 6 plays at 10 seconds each and have 20 seconds and 2 or 3 plays at the endzone from our redzone, that's a pretty good shot at scoring.

Scenario B: Opposing offense has 40 seconds: If each play takes 10 seconds again, they now have only 3 tries to get 60 yards and have 1 or 2 shots at the endzone in scoring. This means your defense doesn't have to worry about anything less than 20 yards deep, and if there's any completions over the middle, even if they were for 40 yards, that would burn something like 30 seconds off the clock and the next shot would have to go at the endzone.

In other words - half decent prevent defense should make scenario B impossible against any offense, no matter how talented as long as you sit back and keep everything in front of you, where as scenario A gives them enough time to have a realistic shot at tieing the game. (I'll flesh this out more in point 4 as well)


3.) Touchdown was required, not a field goal:

The Ravens needed a touchdown, not a field goal, comebacks like the one Matt Ryan lead with timeouts and 30 seconds to score a field goal is relatively common, touchdowns off a prayer pass with 40 seconds left is almost unheard of.

4.) It is impossible for the opposing team to win if you play prevent properly.

NFL plays, even when running no huddle require 6-10 seconds to execute, and another 10 setup for a second play, the Ravens essentially had time to run a total of 3 full plays over the middle or 4 plays to the sideline assuming Flacco hits all of his completions.

This means each completion must average over 20 yards to even have a shot at the endzone that's not a hail mary. If you rush 3 and play prevent the likelyhood of scoring is almost 0%, why would anyone whose logical not like those odds?

5.) Peyton Manning made the right field call:

Manning is a cerebral player, if he sees 2-high safeties, he knows its 7 in the box and a run is almost guaranteed to get at least some yardage, in fact, we could even make an argument on the question: What is more likely to gain a first down against a defense looking for pass with a 2-man coverage called? A run or a pass?

Who said we had no chance to pick up that first down with a run. We in actuality ran time off the clock and gave ourselves a chance to get the first down as well - a chance probably not much worse than the slim chance at converting a 3rd and long over the air against 2 high man.

Conclusion:

I want to be politically correct and say something down the middle, but you guys who are criticizing manning or the offensive call are all a bunch of ****ing idiots.

You run the ball there, that gives you the best chance to win in that situation. They were down a touchdown not a fieldgoal, there were 0 timeouts and field position gave us the best chance to win with defense.

At some point you have play defense in the NFL, otherwise everyone would onside kick it every single time. In this game we lost because of poor safety play.

If you want to blame John Fox, blame him because didn't play prevent at a point in the game where pressing your corners up in the flats with a cover 2 defense made no sense (who the **** cares about 5-10 yard outs with 40 seconds left and 80 yards to go for a touchdown?).

So go ahead make fire Moore or fire fox threads about defensive errors but don't talk about stupid sh*t like "we should've gone for the first down". That's the stupidest sh*t i've ever heard.

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 09:32 AM
agreed

Smiling Assassin27
01-14-2013, 09:32 AM
I would put the ball in the hands of my best player and throw it.


Sincerely,

Bill Bellichick


p.s. My guy would make that play with skill guys half as good as Peyton's, would yours?

MagicHef
01-14-2013, 09:33 AM
It was the right call.

WolfpackGuy
01-14-2013, 09:35 AM
Running the ball and running the clock down was the right choice.

I don't recall ever seeing a safety AT ANY LEVEL answer a prayer of a throw like that in that situation.

spdirty
01-14-2013, 09:35 AM
Good thread. I agree, and agreed at the time, only I was yelling at them to kneel on it on 2nd and 3rd down to eliminate any chance of a fumble. Think at the time I even said that in the gameday thread. Give it to the defense, they have 1:20 with no timeouts and 80 yards to go. Play extreme prevent and VonDoom should have gotten the game clinching sacks, like they have so many times before.

Rahim Moore is more responsible for this loss than anyone.

Life sucks right now.

spdirty
01-14-2013, 09:38 AM
Now when we got the ball back with 32 seconds left with 2 timeouts, and needing about 40-50 yards to give Prater a shot, and kneeled, thats where I will wholeheartedly agree with the Fox outrage there.

Rahim Moore cost us the lead. And after that I say Fox cost us the game.

Smiling Assassin27
01-14-2013, 09:41 AM
Do you recall the AFC divisional round at Pittsburgh? Elway was faced with a 3rd and 5 in his territory. You're saying he should've run the ball and punted it? Well, we all know what he did. He told Shannon Sharpe to just get open. He converted it and the rest is history.

Fox exhibited his fear of failure by running it into the line on 3rd and 7. Percentages are nice, but if you go by percentages, the broncos punt to the steelers and they tie or win, in all likelihood. What do you lose if you don't convert? 2 yards and you STILL get to punt it deep, albeit with 30 more seconds on the clock.

I disagree with the OP take. You throw it--even a wr screen to DT or something where he can stay in bounds if he's short. Running it with hillman was submission.

B-Large
01-14-2013, 09:45 AM
I would put the ball in the hands of my best player and throw it.


Sincerely,

Bill Bellichick


p.s. My guy would make that play with skill guys half as good as Peyton's, would yours?


Do you play to win, or do you play the percentages, that is the question...

With my Defense giving up big plays, with no pass rush and some young guys in the secondary, I would have put the ball in Manning's hands and let he and Stockley have a chance to ice that bitch.....

I don't know, my backs are down and out, I let Manning put the game on his shoulders..

I don't think Fox was wrong with the call, its all relative, but like you said, BB I have to think throws a pass and stomps on the opposing teams nads... but then again, maybe thats why BB and Brady will be playing in New Orleans most likely, and hositing another big silver trophy...

TonyR
01-14-2013, 09:46 AM
I've been arguing this since Saturday night, you just did a more thorough job. 100% correct, good thread.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 09:47 AM
Do you recall the AFC divisional round at Pittsburgh? Elway was faced with a 3rd and 5 in his territory. You're saying he should've run the ball and punted it? Well, we all know what he did. He told Shannon Sharpe to just get open. He converted it and the rest is history.

Was the situation remotely the same? Would Pittsburgh have been left with ~75 seconds, ~80 yards, and no time outs to score a tying TD? If not then your argument doesn't hold even a drop of water.

B-Large
01-14-2013, 09:49 AM
Do you recall the AFC divisional round at Pittsburgh? Elway was faced with a 3rd and 5 in his territory. You're saying he should've run the ball and punted it? Well, we all know what he did. He told Shannon Sharpe to just get open. He converted it and the rest is history.

Fox exhibited his fear of failure by running it into the line on 3rd and 7. Percentages are nice, but if you go by percentages, the broncos punt to the steelers and they tie or win, in all likelihood. What do you lose if you don't convert? 2 yards and you STILL get to punt it deep, albeit with 30 more seconds on the clock.

I disagree with the OP take. You throw it--even a wr screen to DT or something where he can stay in bounds if he's short. Running it with hillman was submission.

were it Willis or Knowshon, maybe, but Hillman? What are the percentages of Ronnie getting a first down on 3rd and 7? My guess, 0%? He hasn't enough expereince and he is not a thrid down back...

canadianbroncosfan
01-14-2013, 09:50 AM
I totally agree with the 3rd and 7 call, you take 40 seconds off the clock. I saw someone yesterday post a stat that statistically Baltimore had a 3% chance of making a TD. I take the 97% choice all day long.

What I don't agree with is the kneel down. The Matt Ryan comparisons are that Denver had 30 seconds left with 2 timeouts and took the kneel down. At that point, Peyton would've only need to put us in FG range.

Rohirrim
01-14-2013, 09:52 AM
I agreed with the call at the time in the game thread and haven't changed my mind. This is like one of those deals in baseball where the manager plays the percentages and it doesn't work out and the fans call for his head. Well, 90% of the time it does work out.

B-Large
01-14-2013, 09:52 AM
I totally agree with the 3rd and 7 call, you take 40 seconds off the clock. I saw someone yesterday post a stat that statistically Baltimore had a 3% chance of making a TD. I take the 97% choice all day long.

What I don't agree with is the kneel down. The Matt Ryan comparisons are that Denver had 30 seconds left with 2 timeouts and took the kneel down. At that point, Peyton would've only need to put us in FG range.

Live by the percentages, die by the percentages I guess.....

TonyR
01-14-2013, 09:54 AM
I totally agree with the 3rd and 7 call, you take 40 seconds off the clock. I saw someone yesterday post a stat that statistically Baltimore had a 3% chance of making a TD. I take the 97% choice all day long.

What I don't agree with is the kneel down. The Matt Ryan comparisons are that Denver had 30 seconds left with 2 timeouts and took the kneel down. At that point, Peyton would've only need to put us in FG range.

^ Exactly. People are complaining about the wrong things. The play you mention, the handoff to Hester on 3rd down, and the field goal attempt are the calls people should be more angry about.

BroncoInferno
01-14-2013, 09:54 AM
Now when we got the ball back with 32 seconds left with 2 timeouts, and needing about 40-50 yards to give Prater a shot, and kneeled, thats where I will wholeheartedly agree with the Fox outrage there.


This. I understand the rationale behind running on 3rd and 7. I can't for the life of me understand why you kneel on the ball with 32 seconds and 2 timeouts left. How do you know your offense is even going to get another chance? In nearly identical circumstances (31 seconds left, 2 timeouts), Ryan got Atlanta in position for the game-winning field goal. How can you not give Manning a chance in that scenario? I don't even view that as a "conservative" call because you don't even know if your offense will ever get the ball again. That's just stupid, not conservative. Did Fox address this after the game?

SonOfLe-loLang
01-14-2013, 09:54 AM
Yeah, im not killing them for the run there. Again, when Flacco threw that ball, we had a win chance of 97.2 percent. Ill take that everytime. It's hindsight thinking. Actually at the time i wanted them to throw it, and now in hindsight, i dont think it was a bad decision to run it.

Play action on second down wouldnt have been so bad though

edog24
01-14-2013, 09:54 AM
So why even have a coaching staff? If we are just playing the percentages then get 4 math wizards in a room with a phone and have them tell Manning what the next play call is. The beauty of having a competent front staff is making adjustments and getting a sense of whats going on in the game. This game had all the makings of an upset, our D was garbage all night, and we had a chance to ice it. We need to play to win, not to play to percentages.

At the end of the day, who's hands do you want the game to rest in? Your HOF QB, or our young secondary who was getting owned all game long?

TonyR
01-14-2013, 09:56 AM
I agreed with the call at the time in the game thread and haven't changed my mind. This is like one of those deals in baseball where the manager plays the percentages and it doesn't work out and the fans call for his head. Well, 90% of the time it does work out.

Yup. I was at a party for the game, no Broncos fans except me. Before the play we discussed what the Broncos should do there. Every guy, about 6 of us, said Denver should run. People are only mad because of the overall outcome and the desire to blame. If the Broncos win as they should have there would be no mention of this play.

BroncoInferno
01-14-2013, 09:56 AM
Play action on second down wouldnt have been so bad though

Yeah, if you are going to throw it, you do it on 1st or 2nd down, not a 3rd and long.

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 09:57 AM
I would put the ball in the hands of my best player and throw it.


Sincerely,

Bill Bellichick


p.s. My guy would make that play with skill guys half as good as Peyton's, would yours?

Reminds me of the 2007 AFC Championship. Bill did exactly what you proposed, except he only had 2 yards to go. Threw it just short and lost the game because of it.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-14-2013, 09:57 AM
So why even have a coaching staff? If we are just playing the percentages then get 4 math wizards in a room with a phone and have them tell Manning what the next play call is. The beauty of having a competent front staff is making adjustments and getting a sense of whats going on in the game. This game had all the makings of an upset, our D was garbage all night, and we had a chance to ice it. We need to play to win, not to play to percentages.

At the end of the day, who's hands do you want the game to rest in? Your HOF QB, or our young secondary who was getting owned all game long?

This is such hindsight thinking. If they gave the ravens the ball back with 2:22 and two timeouts, id fully agree with you. What happened on that Moore play was a huge fluke. It just DOESN'T happen. In fact, let me pose this question.

If i gave you the same exact situation now: Ravens have the ball with :40 seconds left, no time outs, and they need a score....or you can give the Broncos one 3rd and 7, which do you choose?

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 09:59 AM
So why even have a coaching staff? If we are just playing the percentages then get 4 math wizards in a room with a phone and have them tell Manning what the next play call is. The beauty of having a competent front staff is making adjustments and getting a sense of whats going on in the game. This game had all the makings of an upset, our D was garbage all night, and we had a chance to ice it. We need to play to win, not to play to percentages.

At the end of the day, who's hands do you want the game to rest in? Your HOF QB, or our young secondary who was getting owned all game long?

I don't care how bad you're getting owned on defense. Nobody could possibly anticipate giving up 80 yards in 30 seconds with no timeouts. You can't coach to anticipate THAT much suckage.

outdoor_miner
01-14-2013, 09:59 AM
I 100% agree that this was the right decision. It is a no-brainer. The odds of Moore (or someone else on Defense) completely crapping the bed were extremely low. Unfortunately, it happened, but it doesn't mean they made the wrong call.

My major issue with Fox were the friggin kneel-downs at the end of the halves, particularly the one at the end of the game. So cowardly. My issue with Manning was I thought he audibled into too many runs in the second half and OT. They just seemed to let the passing game get totally out of rhythm. I don't know why he kept running on 2nd and 1. Why not take a shot downfield in that situation? Ughhhhh. Worst. Game. Ever.

Smiling Assassin27
01-14-2013, 09:59 AM
Was the situation remotely the same? Would Pittsburgh have been left with ~75 seconds, ~80 yards, and no time outs to score a tying TD? If not then your argument doesn't hold even a drop of water.

The argument is valid because the situations are SIMILAR, not exactly the same. Broncos ahead? Check. In their own territory? Check. 3rd down and medium distance? Check. in fact, elway was at his own 15 yard line, so the play was RISKIER then than on saturday. it was the first play after the two minute warning, so if elway doesn't make it, they give the steelers even MORE time than they would've given flacco, and with better field position for them.

'just get open'...it speaks to a mentality, one in which elway/shanny could've just run it once and punted, but instead chose to throw and were rewarded for it. if you can't see the similarity, i can't help you, man.

ludo21
01-14-2013, 10:01 AM
In hindsight I trust my HOF QB to make a play...

but in the moment I agreed, you take the time off the clock...

BUT I HATED THE KNEEEL DOWN!!!! BOTH OF THEM!!!!!!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

I had friggin nightmares Saturday night about those.. ;(

Smiling Assassin27
01-14-2013, 10:01 AM
Reminds me of the 2007 AFC Championship. Bill did exactly what you proposed, except he only had 2 yards to go. Threw it just short and lost the game because of it.

Exactly. There are never guarantees that you make it, but we weren't in a 4th down situation, which makes ALL the difference in the world.

B-Large
01-14-2013, 10:01 AM
So why even have a coaching staff? If we are just playing the percentages then get 4 math wizards in a room with a phone and have them tell Manning what the next play call is. The beauty of having a competent front staff is making adjustments and getting a sense of whats going on in the game. This game had all the makings of an upset, our D was garbage all night, and we had a chance to ice it. We need to play to win, not to play to percentages.

At the end of the day, who's hands do you want the game to rest in? Your HOF QB, or our young secondary who was getting owned all game long?

If we didn't have Manning and perhaps Romo, I'd agree with the run.. but when you have the best intermediate passer in the league, man, its hard not to lean on he guy.....

There are just times in sports when you have to dip deep in the gut and put the game away.... I don't really care about the 97% chance of winning at that point, all I know now we played the numbers with a HOF QB at the helm and lost to a team we should have handled.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 10:02 AM
We need to play to win, not to play to percentages.

So, if you had a ~97% chance to win $1,000,000 you'd take a gamble on a much lower percentage play?

Tombstone RJ
01-14-2013, 10:02 AM
Seriously i remember coming to the mane because the team forum at denverbroncos.com was full of retards that don't know a thing about football, well now i'm not sure this place is significantly better, considering all i hear is that we should have passed the ball on third and long with 1:20 left.

Here's why all of you are dead wrong.

1.) Chance of conversion is EXTREMELY LOW:

The highest conversion rate of 3rd downs in the entire NFL is New England at an impressive 48%. That's including 3rd and 1's, 3rd and 2's, 3rd and 3's. The Actual likelihood of converting a 3rd and 7 with the best offense in the NFL is way way way below 50%.

2.) Field position and Time:

40 seconds left, 0 time outs, 80 yards: This is what the offense hands the defense.

When exactly 80 seconds are left on the clock, 40 seconds equates to 50% of the time left, when you sit nearly at mid field, your punt has an extremely high chance of pinning the opponent inside their 20.

so Here's what you get by running off 40 seconds.

Scenario A: Opposing offense has 80 seconds: If each play takes 10 seconds on average to run, they can cover 60 yards in 6 plays at 10 seconds each and have 20 seconds and 2 or 3 plays at the endzone from our redzone, that's a pretty good shot at scoring.

Scenario B: Opposing offense has 40 seconds: If each play takes 10 seconds again, they now have only 3 tries to get 60 yards and have 1 or 2 shots at the endzone in scoring. This means your defense doesn't have to worry about anything less than 20 yards deep, and if there's any completions over the middle, even if they were for 40 yards, that would burn something like 30 seconds off the clock and the next shot would have to go at the endzone.

In other words - half decent prevent defense should make scenario B impossible against any offense, no matter how talented as long as you sit back and keep everything in front of you, where as scenario A gives them enough time to have a realistic shot at tieing the game. (I'll flesh this out more in point 4 as well)


3.) Touchdown was required, not a field goal:

The Ravens needed a touchdown, not a field goal, comebacks like the one Matt Ryan lead with timeouts and 30 seconds to score a field goal is relatively common, touchdowns off a prayer pass with 40 seconds left is almost unheard of.

4.) It is impossible for the opposing team to win if you play prevent properly.

NFL plays, even when running no huddle require 6-10 seconds to execute, and another 10 setup for a second play, the Ravens essentially had time to run a total of 3 full plays over the middle or 4 plays to the sideline assuming Flacco hits all of his completions.

This means each completion must average over 20 yards to even have a shot at the endzone that's not a hail mary. If you rush 3 and play prevent the likelyhood of scoring is almost 0%, why would anyone whose logical not like those odds?

5.) Peyton Manning made the right field call:

Manning is a cerebral player, if he sees 2-high safeties, he knows its 7 in the box and a run is almost guaranteed to get at least some yardage, in fact, we could even make an argument on the question: What is more likely to gain a first down against a defense looking for pass with a 2-man coverage called? A run or a pass?

Who said we had no chance to pick up that first down with a run. We in actuality ran time off the clock and gave ourselves a chance to get the first down as well - a chance probably not much worse than the slim chance at converting a 3rd and long over the air against 2 high man.

Conclusion:

I want to be politically correct and say something down the middle, but you guys who are criticizing manning or the offensive call are all a bunch of ****ing idiots.

You run the ball there, that gives you the best chance to win in that situation. They were down a touchdown not a fieldgoal, there were 0 timeouts and field position gave us the best chance to win with defense.

At some point you have play defense in the NFL, otherwise everyone would onside kick it every single time. In this game we lost because of poor safety play.

If you want to blame John Fox, blame him because didn't play prevent at a point in the game where pressing your corners up in the flats with a cover 2 defense made no sense (who the **** cares about 5-10 yard outs with 40 seconds left and 80 yards to go for a touchdown?).

So go ahead make fire Moore or fire fox threads about defensive errors but don't talk about stupid sh*t like "we should've gone for the first down". That's the stupidest sh*t i've ever heard.

I agree, for the situation it was the right call. The head scratcher for me was the end of the first half where the Broncos had 30 seconds and 2 time outs. Why take a knee? Why not at least try to move the ball down the field to at least try for a field goal. This is why you have PM. Let him do his thing!

Rohirrim
01-14-2013, 10:09 AM
"Three things can happen when you pass the ball, and two of those are bad." Woody Hayes

Smiling Assassin27
01-14-2013, 10:11 AM
So, if you had a ~97% chance to win $1,000,000 you'd take a gamble on a much lower percentage play?


Yeah, that's EXACTLY the same. :~ohyah!:

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 10:13 AM
Honest question because I haven't seen any of the post game interviews:

Do we even know if a run was called by McCoy/Fox, or is it possible that a pass/run option was called and Manning audibled to the run himself based on something he saw from the defense?

edog24
01-14-2013, 10:13 AM
So, if you had a ~97% chance to win $1,000,000 you'd take a gamble on a much lower percentage play?


I see the point in playing the percentages, it just has to be dependent on the situation I guess. If the 3% has a genius at the healm and if the 97% was dependent on retards to make it happen, I guess I don't take the 97%.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 10:13 AM
The argument is valid because the situations are SIMILAR...

But how similar? What was the score? Would a FG have tied it or won it for Pittsburgh in your scenario? If yes, the there is no comparison here. Denver had to convert to have a good chance to win that game. In the Ravens game, they just had to use clock and kick away to a team with no time outs and very little time to go 80 yards and score a TD.

MplsBronco
01-14-2013, 10:14 AM
So, if you had a ~97% chance to win $1,000,000 you'd take a gamble on a much lower percentage play?

WTF are you talking about? Throwing on 3rd as opposed to running now means we lose? What does your 97% look like with and extra 30 seconds? Probably still pretty high.

Neither does throwing automatically mean an incomplete pass. Something high percentage could have been called ensuring the clock continued to run. A sack would also have been acceptable.

The question is, where were the percentages higher at gaining a first down? Throwing or running? The goal, the mentality should have been gaining one more first down and ending the game in teh VICTORY formation.

I disagreed with it at the time and I disagree now more so than ever so its not hindsight. It was flat out loser football and disgusts me.

This was the exact situation of why we got Manning and are paying him $20m. If he audibled to this then we are suredly f'ed for the foreseeable future and should disappoint all.

B-Large
01-14-2013, 10:16 AM
So, if you had a ~97% chance to win $1,000,000 you'd take a gamble on a much lower percentage play?


Its a layered Decision, not quite as simple as stated about, if the D was playing Lights Out, the the run is a no brainer... but our D was not very good...

strafen
01-14-2013, 10:18 AM
"You play to win the game"!

First of all, if would've been the right call if we had the right running back. Not the back-up of the back-up who happens to be undersized and a rookie.
You've got one of the best intermediate passers the game has ever known, and you decide to run the ball under the circumnstances I've described above?
No thanks. I'm not sold on your argument...

Smiling Assassin27
01-14-2013, 10:19 AM
But how similar? What was the score? Would a FG have tied it or won it for Pittsburgh in your scenario? If yes, the there is no comparison here. Denver had to convert to have a good chance to win that game. In the Ravens game, they just had to use clock and kick away to a team with no time outs and very little time to go 80 yards and score a TD.

A fg ties it, just like a td ties it saturday. Kordell had thrown 3 INT's that day, so had they punted it away it was no given that the steelers would've scored. the ravens needed a td to tie. if they have an extra 25 seconds or so (assuming we do not convert and the clock stops, which wouldn't necessarily be the case since a wr screen wit wr staying in bounds would leave the clock running), maybe they have to run more plays. we'll never know, it's just a philosophical difference, i guess.

one play is all you need to win. some look at it as an opportunity, and others look at it as a chance to get the pressure off you and onto someone else (your defense).

MplsBronco
01-14-2013, 10:25 AM
A fg ties it, just like a td ties it saturday. Kordell had thrown 3 INT's that day, so had they punted it away it was no given that the steelers would've scored. the ravens needed a td to tie. if they have an extra 25 seconds or so (assuming we do not convert and the clock stops, which wouldn't necessarily be the case since a wr screen wit wr staying in bounds would leave the clock running), maybe they have to run more plays. we'll never know, it's just a philosophical difference, i guess.

one play is all you need to win. some look at it as an opportunity, and others look at it as a chance to get the pressure off you and onto someone else (your defense).

Bolded for truth. Why is this even debated. You go down swinging. Instead, all Balt needed was one play to tie and they made it happen.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 10:26 AM
A fg ties it, just like a td ties it saturday.

But you have to admit, the odds of driving ~30 yards into FG range are considerably higher than driving 80 yards for a TD. Particularly when you factor in time and time outs. A punt in the Pittsburgh game probably gives the Steelers a high probability of tying the game, so Denver needed to try to convert. A punt in the Ravens game gave Denver a very high probability of winning, so no need to try to convert with a pass.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 10:28 AM
WTF are you talking about?

Did you read the OP? Chance of converting that 3rd down with a pass is relatively low, therefore increasing the Ravens chances of tying the game. Why would you take the low percentage play over the 90+% play? Again, you're only upset because the Ravens cashed in on the low percentage probability due to a miracle and the Broncos' incompetence.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-14-2013, 10:28 AM
Its a layered Decision, not quite as simple as stated about, if the D was playing Lights Out, the the run is a no brainer... but our D was not very good...

Its not a layered decision at all. If i gave you the same exact situation to do all over agian, you'd take it in a heartbeat. It happened, and that sucks, but its hindsight thinking to say it was a horrible thing to do.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 10:30 AM
You go down swinging.

But you don't have to "go down" if you correctly play the desperation throw the Ravens tied the game with. You should be mad at the d-backs on that play, not John Fox for choosing to run the ball in that particular situation.

Smiling Assassin27
01-14-2013, 10:31 AM
But you have to admit, the odds of driving ~30 yards into FG range are considerably higher than driving 80 yards for a TD. Particularly when you factor in time and time outs. A punt in the Pittsburgh game probably gives the Steelers a high probability of tying the game, so Denver needed to try to convert. A punt in the Ravens game gave Denver a very high probability of winning, so no need to try to convert with a pass.

That is probably true. As i said, we could've thrown a safe pass and let a guy like DT make a play, stay in bounds and then either move to 4th down or move the chains and take the diamon formation. We could've STILL had the option of making them drive 80 yards for a TD. I trust Manning not to *cough* throw an INT in that situation, and if there's nothing there/no one open, he can always go down and we STILL can put 'em in the 80 yard drive scenario.

Smiling Assassin27
01-14-2013, 10:35 AM
Its not a layered decision at all. If i gave you the same exact situation to do all over agian, you'd take it in a heartbeat. It happened, and that sucks, but its hindsight thinking to say it was a horrible thing to do.

I disagree. It's not a hindsight thing at all. As long as you minimize the chances of a bad thing happening (int/fumble), it's a perfect time to run a smart pass play. The reward outweighs the risk, if you play it smart. Instead, we went with plan b. by all accounts, punting it to them should not have resulted in the tying td, so that's not a bad call, just a timid one that reflects a conservative mindset.

Rohirrim
01-14-2013, 10:38 AM
I think the loss of Moreno was a major factor in that final call. Hillman was going down on first contact. PM had to know, by that point, that he had no play action to work with. It was going to be a straight toss, and probably a heavy blitz. I don't know what the Ratbirds were playing at that moment, but I assume it was at least a nickle package. Maybe even dime? I'm guessing that everything he saw on that field screamed "RUN." Does anybody know the routes that were called on that play? I'm guessing it would be something designed to empty the middle and pull off Lewis? So what do you do? Bubble screen? Dump off to a back? Screen? Flat? Hook route? You've got two out of three chances that something bad is going to happen, and an incomplete doesn't burn any clock.

Tombstone RJ
01-14-2013, 10:41 AM
What suprises me is the Lance Ball never got a snap as a RB, yet Hester got snaps at RB? In those short yardage situations I'd give the ball to Ball over Hillman.

MplsBronco
01-14-2013, 10:41 AM
Did you read the OP? Chance of converting that 3rd down with a pass is relatively low, therefore increasing the Ravens chances of tying the game. Why would you take the low percentage play over the 90+% play? Again, you're only upset because the Ravens cashed in on the low percentage probability due to a miracle and the Broncos' incompetence.

The arguement is what gives you the best chance to make a first down and win the game? Running or Passing? The mentality should have been closing out the game and not giving them the ball back. That is the arguement.

Again, you make no sense with the "low percentage play over the 90+% play". A pass does not automatically mean a loss. So stop this arguement. Even an incomplete pass and 30 more seconds for Balt probably still puts your 97% probablity at highr than 90%.

You clearly are happy with a team with a pussy mentality. I hate the Patriots but I admire their mentality. And its why they are in the AFCCG yet again.

LetsGoBroncos
01-14-2013, 10:44 AM
Seriously i remember coming to the mane because the team forum at denverbroncos.com was full of retards that don't know a thing about football, well now i'm not sure this place is significantly better, considering all i hear is that we should have passed the ball on third and long with 1:20 left.

Here's why all of you are dead wrong.

1.) Chance of conversion is EXTREMELY LOW:

The highest conversion rate of 3rd downs in the entire NFL is New England at an impressive 48%. That's including 3rd and 1's, 3rd and 2's, 3rd and 3's. The Actual likelihood of converting a 3rd and 7 with the best offense in the NFL is way way way below 50%.

2.) Field position and Time:

40 seconds left, 0 time outs, 80 yards: This is what the offense hands the defense.

When exactly 80 seconds are left on the clock, 40 seconds equates to 50% of the time left, when you sit nearly at mid field, your punt has an extremely high chance of pinning the opponent inside their 20.

so Here's what you get by running off 40 seconds.

Scenario A: Opposing offense has 80 seconds: If each play takes 10 seconds on average to run, they can cover 60 yards in 6 plays at 10 seconds each and have 20 seconds and 2 or 3 plays at the endzone from our redzone, that's a pretty good shot at scoring.

Scenario B: Opposing offense has 40 seconds: If each play takes 10 seconds again, they now have only 3 tries to get 60 yards and have 1 or 2 shots at the endzone in scoring. This means your defense doesn't have to worry about anything less than 20 yards deep, and if there's any completions over the middle, even if they were for 40 yards, that would burn something like 30 seconds off the clock and the next shot would have to go at the endzone.

In other words - half decent prevent defense should make scenario B impossible against any offense, no matter how talented as long as you sit back and keep everything in front of you, where as scenario A gives them enough time to have a realistic shot at tieing the game. (I'll flesh this out more in point 4 as well)


3.) Touchdown was required, not a field goal:

The Ravens needed a touchdown, not a field goal, comebacks like the one Matt Ryan lead with timeouts and 30 seconds to score a field goal is relatively common, touchdowns off a prayer pass with 40 seconds left is almost unheard of.

4.) It is impossible for the opposing team to win if you play prevent properly.

NFL plays, even when running no huddle require 6-10 seconds to execute, and another 10 setup for a second play, the Ravens essentially had time to run a total of 3 full plays over the middle or 4 plays to the sideline assuming Flacco hits all of his completions.

This means each completion must average over 20 yards to even have a shot at the endzone that's not a hail mary. If you rush 3 and play prevent the likelyhood of scoring is almost 0%, why would anyone whose logical not like those odds?

5.) Peyton Manning made the right field call:

Manning is a cerebral player, if he sees 2-high safeties, he knows its 7 in the box and a run is almost guaranteed to get at least some yardage, in fact, we could even make an argument on the question: What is more likely to gain a first down against a defense looking for pass with a 2-man coverage called? A run or a pass?

Who said we had no chance to pick up that first down with a run. We in actuality ran time off the clock and gave ourselves a chance to get the first down as well - a chance probably not much worse than the slim chance at converting a 3rd and long over the air against 2 high man.

Conclusion:

I want to be politically correct and say something down the middle, but you guys who are criticizing manning or the offensive call are all a bunch of ****ing idiots.

You run the ball there, that gives you the best chance to win in that situation. They were down a touchdown not a fieldgoal, there were 0 timeouts and field position gave us the best chance to win with defense.

At some point you have play defense in the NFL, otherwise everyone would onside kick it every single time. In this game we lost because of poor safety play.

If you want to blame John Fox, blame him because didn't play prevent at a point in the game where pressing your corners up in the flats with a cover 2 defense made no sense (who the **** cares about 5-10 yard outs with 40 seconds left and 80 yards to go for a touchdown?).

So go ahead make fire Moore or fire fox threads about defensive errors but don't talk about stupid sh*t like "we should've gone for the first down". That's the stupidest sh*t i've ever heard.

I agree with you. It is easy to say after our Safety makes a mistake for the ages and we end up losing that we should have thrown on 3rd and 7. The ONLY thing I can say that maybe we could have done differently would have been to call a pass play but tell Manning if it's not there take the sack and keep the clock moving.

All in all though I think if we throw and it is incomplete and Baltimore comes back to win we are all yelling that we should have run and taken the clock down to a minute.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 10:45 AM
Just cause its a passing play doesn't mean you have to pass if no one is open. Manning could just lay down to keep the clock rolling. You want to play the percentage game? Ok. How about they have a 0% chance of winning if you make that 1st down. This isn't even as bad as kneeling with half a minute and 2 timeouts. That showed ZERO trust in the offense. Twice.

There's points when players/coaches become dead to me. With shanny it was refusing to fire Slowik. With tebow it was the last KC game. Now I'm done with Fox after that kneel down crap. Atlanta scored in 31 seconds. You have WRs a QB and long legged kicker with 2 timeouts and you give up?? That's unforgivable.

MplsBronco
01-14-2013, 10:45 AM
I think the loss of Moreno was a major factor in that final call. Hillman was going down on first contact. PM had to know, by that point, that he had no play action to work with. It was going to be a straight toss, and probably a heavy blitz. I don't know what the Ratbirds were playing at that moment, but I assume it was at least a nickle package. Maybe even dime? I'm guessing that everything he saw on that field screamed "RUN." Does anybody know the routes that were called on that play? I'm guessing it would be something designed to empty the middle and pull off Lewis? So what do you do? Bubble screen? Dump off to a back? Screen? Flat? Hook route? You've got two out of three chances that something bad is going to happen, and an incomplete doesn't burn any clock.

Good points, but why not dictate the terms with your formation? Why not come out in 5 wides in the shotgun. Make balt adjust. Instead just vanilla dive off guard.

24champ
01-14-2013, 10:47 AM
In hindsight I trust my HOF QB to make a play...

but in the moment I agreed, you take the time off the clock...

BUT I HATED THE KNEEEL DOWN!!!! BOTH OF THEM!!!!!!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

I had friggin nightmares Saturday night about those.. ;(

This.

I agreed with the run play, but for crying out loud, you have 30 seconds and timeouts to get a FG to win the game.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 10:49 AM
I hate the Patriots but I admire their mentality. And its why they are in the AFCCG yet again.

I'd argue they're in the game because of some combination of being better than us, not sh*tting the bed against Houston the way we did against Baltimore, and not getting shafted by the refs.

Rohirrim
01-14-2013, 10:51 AM
Good points, but why not dictate the terms with your formation? Why not come out in 5 wides in the shotgun. Make balt adjust. Instead just vanilla dive off guard.

Because then you risk Suggs planting your QB in the ground. I just really believe that the loss of Moreno colored the whole playcalling mindset.

MplsBronco
01-14-2013, 10:59 AM
I'd argue they're in the game because of some combination of being better than us, not sh*tting the bed against Houston the way we did against Baltimore, and not getting shafted by the refs.

They've been in this position repeatedly over the last decade. People criticize them for putting up 50 on ppl. How many times this year did we take the gas off the pedal and let teams score late? Its a mentality, not something fostered in a single game. We lack it and it showed. Do you think Belichek plays it the same way? Or do you think he goes for the win?

And don't give me this talent BS. We have the supposed GOAT at QB and some pretty damn good receivers.

Rohirrim
01-14-2013, 11:02 AM
They've been in this position repeatedly over the last decade. People criticize them for putting up 50 on ppl. How many times this year did we take the gas off the pedal and let teams score late? Its a mentality, not something fostered in a single game. We lack it and it showed. Do you think Belichek plays it the same way? Or do you think he goes for the win?

And don't give me this talent BS. We have the supposed GOAT at QB and some pretty damn good receivers.

If he didn't have Ridley and Woodhead to put in the game, I'll bet he makes the same call.

broncocalijohn
01-14-2013, 11:07 AM
THe blame is on Moore. They said that the chances for the Ravens to tie the score at that moment was 3%. We did everything right to put us in the position to win and the slim luck blew it. There were other coaching mistakes before that one. If anything, I would have liked to see a play action, safe short throw on 2nd down as the Ravens would have never expected it.

MplsBronco
01-14-2013, 11:10 AM
If he didn't have Ridley and Woodhead to put in the game, I'll bet he makes the same call.

Wait, missing his 2 best RB's you think Belichek runs it? Funny, I think that means he passes it. But I think he passes it anyway. I think he plays it with the mentality that Balt is not getting the ball again, no matter what it takes.

Gutless Drunk
01-14-2013, 11:10 AM
This.

I agreed with the run play, but for crying out loud, you have 30 seconds and timeouts to get a FG to win the game.

"In a tie game, the Broncos started their final drive on their own 20 with 0:31 seconds remaining and two timeouts in hand. John Fox says, "Let's take it to overtime" and has potentially the greatest quarterback ever kneel down instead of trying for the game-winning field goal. That wasn't the first time the Broncos made this mistake. In fact, they made an eerily similar gaffe at the end of the first half. After missing a field goal and allowing a long Torrey Smith touchdown, the Broncos received the ball at the 20 with 0:36 seconds left and three timeouts. John Fox ran the ball one time and headed to the locker room. The only real explanation is that Fox believes momentum has predictive power. His thought process was probably that after two huge plays from Baltimore, the only thing that could come from an attempted 30-second drive is a game-changing mistake.


Let's look at the facts. The Broncos have Peyton Manning at the helm. They are playing at Mile High which adds about 5-yards to field goal range. The Broncos have 2+ timeouts in both situations. At the end of regulation, if it's tied, you go to overtime where there is a 50% chance of winning the game. According to Brian's win probability calculator, the initial win probability of the final drive was 54% (if you include the fact that it was played at Mile High).

I pulled all the drives that started between 20 and 40 seconds left in the game with 2+ timeouts, in a 3-point to 0-point deficit range (those ranges where a field goal would be the primary goal of the offense) since 2000 where the offense did not just kneel or run the ball into the end of the game. It was also limited to those drives that started inside a team's own 30-yard line. I found 21 such drives, here were the results:

32000

First thing to note is that 21 is not a huge sample size, but at least it provides a baseline for an analysis of the Broncos decision. Out of the 21 drives, seven resulted in a field goal attempt and only one of those was from over 60 yards. One drive resulted in a huge mistake and ultimate loss (Donovan McNabb threw an interception in a tie game which ultimately resulted in a Redskins game-winning field goal). For those 16 drives with no score (including the field goal misses), there is no difference to just kneeling down. In other words, there is no downside, both result in a 50% chance of winning the game as it goes to overtime.

I could have pulled similar situations at the end of the first half, which would have increased the sample size and allowed us a better look at the first half decision to just run the ball, but I wanted to focus especially on the end-of-game scenario where score was the primary factor. These results would suggest that if a team decided to go for the win, it would result in about a 57% chance of winning the game. Add Peyton Manning into the mix and that number certainly increases.

Last game of the season, can't hold anything back.

Oh, and the Atlanta Falcons started their final drive at the 28-yard line with 31 seconds left and two timeouts, and they kicked a go-ahead game-winning field goal (essentially the identical situation). C'mon, John.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2013/01/broncos-botch-final-drives.html

Rohirrim
01-14-2013, 11:11 AM
Wait, missing his 2 best RB's you think Belichek runs it? Funny, I think that means he passes it. But I think he passes it anyway. I think he plays it with the mentality that Balt is not getting the ball again, no matter what it takes.

Actually, he probably does call a pass. But then, he has an Oline he can depend on in that situation.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 11:12 AM
Why is it on the OM when someone doesn't agree with your point they are a "retard" or "retarded"? Simple minds resort to that mindset when their arguement is weak

MplsBronco
01-14-2013, 11:14 AM
Actually, he probably does call a pass. But then, he has an Oline he can depend on in that situation.

Touche.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 11:15 AM
See Gutless Drunk's post above. Those are the situations you should be mad about. That's where Fox screwed up, particularly at the end of regulation.

Rohirrim
01-14-2013, 11:17 AM
See Gutless Drunk's post above. Those are the situations you should be mad about. That's where Fox screwed up, particularly at the end of regulation.

Yeah. Both of those were total head scratchers at the time. I'd love to hear his explanation for those. The only thing I thought at the time was that he didn't trust Hillman, the loss of play action, or the Oline, so he played it safe.

winstoncup bronco
01-14-2013, 11:22 AM
The arguement is what gives you the best chance to make a first down and win the game? Running or Passing? The mentality should have been closing out the game and not giving them the ball back. That is the arguement.

Again, you make no sense with the "low percentage play over the 90+% play". A pass does not automatically mean a loss. So stop this arguement. Even an incomplete pass and 30 more seconds for Balt probably still puts your 97% probablity at highr than 90%.

You clearly are happy with a team with a p***Y mentality. I hate the Patriots but I admire their mentality. And its why they are in the AFCCG yet again.

Thank you.

The call was to give up and give Baltimore the ball.

Baltimore scores and sends us home.

In what universe can that possibly be justified as the right call? We lost the damn game for crying out loud. How does a call that makes you lose any game, let alone a playoff game, get to be considered a right call?

Of course you don't expect Moore to **** the bed. All the more reason not to willingly give up the ball. The unexpected will happen.

And oh yeah, we have Peyton Manning back there making the throw for first down. Why even bother signing him if you're going to take the ball out of his hands at the most clutch moment of the season.

Give me a break with this "right call" nonsense. We lost. It was a bad call.

toad
01-14-2013, 11:29 AM
As uncool as it was (and personally/emotionally disappointing) I think it was the right call. And I have to to assume Fox, McCoy, and Manning were all on the same page.

With a statistically less than 50% conversion rate and a less than 5% chance they score a TD on the way back you have to play that percentage (particularly in an ugly game like this where momentum, officiating, and simple luck hadn't fallen our way).

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 11:33 AM
In what universe can that possibly be justified as the right call? We lost the damn game for crying out loud. How does a call that makes you lose any game, let alone a playoff game, get to be considered a right call?

Because some calls CAN be the right call to make, but the result doesn't turn out the way it could/should and you lose. Happens all the time.

Think about it this way. We ran and we lost. What if we passed the ball and lost? Technically, then, according to you, there was no right call to make since we lost either way.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 11:33 AM
2 teams scored this weekend with 30 seconds. Fox gives up and kneels.

I will never forgive that. He's done in my eyes.

Rohirrim
01-14-2013, 11:41 AM
Because some calls CAN be the right call to make, but the result doesn't turn out the way it could/should and you lose. Happens all the time.

Think about it this way. We ran and we lost. What if we passed the ball and lost? Technically, then, according to you, there was no right call to make since we lost either way.

I put it right up there with a baseball situation where you're the home team, up by one run, bottom of the ninth, have two outs, bases empty, a .300 slugger at the plate, and a .200 batter behind him. You walk the slugger. 100% of the time, you walk the slugger. What happened to us is that the .200 batter then came up and hit a low and outside pitch into the seats. Actually, more like he hit it deep, our centerfielder did a face plant, the ball lodged in the corner of the fence, and it became an inside the park home run.

go_broncos
01-14-2013, 11:42 AM
John Fox is an idiot..He still thinks it's 1970 football.
There is a reason why it's called passing league.
See how SEA almost won the game against ATL.
Seven point lead will not be enough.Teams nowadays are scoring within a minute.
It's frustrating that we didn't even try to score points during the end of regulation.

Wes Mantooth
01-14-2013, 11:43 AM
Thank you.

The call was to give up and give Baltimore the ball.

Baltimore scores and sends us home.

In what universe can that possibly be justified as the right call? We lost the damn game for crying out loud. How does a call that makes you lose any game, let alone a playoff game, get to be considered a right call?

Of course you don't expect Moore to **** the bed. All the more reason not to willingly give up the ball. The unexpected will happen.

And oh yeah, we have Peyton Manning back there making the throw for first down. Why even bother signing him if you're going to take the ball out of his hands at the most clutch moment of the season.

Give me a break with this "right call" nonsense. We lost. It was a bad call.

The D should have been able to manage with no time outs and a 7point lead.

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 11:44 AM
I put it right up there with a baseball situation.....

Good call. That's probably as good an analogy as I've heard.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 11:45 AM
Give me a break with this "right call" nonsense. We lost. It was a bad call.

Your logic is more than just a little bit flawed here. If we passed instead of ran in that situation and lost would that have been the "right call"?

bronco_diesel
01-14-2013, 11:47 AM
I thought that it was the wrong call. You go for the win instead of playing not to lose.

You don’t bring in a HOF QB and pay him $20 million to hand off to the 3rd string running back at the most critical point in the game. You let your best player make a play to end the game.
You also have to look at the way the game had shaped up. They were not getting pressure on Flacco and he’d beaten them deep a couple of times already, and the officiating was not helping you out at all. Of course they were going to throw one up – especially with the potential for PI call. You don’t let it go to that, you go for the win when you have the ball.

You also don’t take a knee with 30 seconds left and 2 time outs. The 3rd and 7 is at least debatable. This is unforgiveable.

The minute they ran the ball on 3rd and 7 I had a very bad feeling they would lose. You can’t keep giving a veteran playoff team chance after chance to beat you.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 11:58 AM
There was all kinds of options on that 3rd and 7. Manning didnt have to throw it if no one was open. Slide or fall down and the clock still runs. At least it would've been a TRY. Don't throw into a tight window but at least see if a route was open. If not drop to the ground and let the clock roll. It was a terrible punt to make things even worse.

Tombstone RJ
01-14-2013, 12:01 PM
IMHO, the worst running plays were handing the ball off to Hillman on 2nd or 3rd and inches and still not getting the first down.

how about a QB sneak? Anyone think of that option?

Gutless Drunk
01-14-2013, 12:06 PM
As far as the kneel down Fox just said he would do it again 10 out of 10 times.
So forgot about him ever changing.

He also said they were "punch drunk" from the big play given up and he felt they needed to "get out of the round"

News conference here: http://www.1043thefan.com/home.aspx

if you can stomach it

WolfpackGuy
01-14-2013, 12:06 PM
IMHO, the worst running plays were handing the ball off to Hillman on 2nd or 3rd and inches and still not getting the first down.

how about a QB sneak? Anyone think of that option?

Or how about Hillman on the edge?

Let's try to run right at Cody and Ngata!

Creativity was sorely lacking in those situations.

Willynowei
01-14-2013, 12:11 PM
Why is it on the OM when someone doesn't agree with your point they are a "retard" or "retarded"? Simple minds resort to that mindset when their arguement is weak

Logic. Get some.

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 12:14 PM
I thought that it was the wrong call. You go for the win instead of playing not to lose.

They went with the option that gave them a 97% chance of winning the game. By definition, that IS going for the win.

LetsGoBroncos
01-14-2013, 12:19 PM
They went with the option that gave them a 97% chance of winning the game. By definition, that IS going for the win.

Exactly. I'm surprised people are upset about this. When they went to the commercial for the 2 minute warning I just assumed we would run and take the clock down to a minute. Didn't even consider passing. An incomplete pass would have been just like Marion Barber running out of bounds last year.

bronco_diesel
01-14-2013, 12:22 PM
They went with the option that gave them a 97% chance of winning the game. By definition, that IS going for the win.

Okay. I'll change the way I phrase it - you go for the jugular.

I think you know what I meant though. I think when you start to play percentages there, you are no longer playing for the win...you are playing the odds to not lose.

The game ends with a 1st down. Period.

Tombstone RJ
01-14-2013, 12:23 PM
As far as the kneel down Fox just said he would do it again 10 out of 10 times.
So forgot about him ever changing.

He also said they were "punch drunk" from the big play given up and he felt they needed to "get out of the round"

News conference here: http://www.1043thefan.com/home.aspx

if you can stomach it

This is what I pretty much thought, that is, this is what I speculated the logic to be. The Broncos have been a second half team all year, they almost always played better in the second half and this was the logic behind the knee down, get into the lockroom and make adjustments.

That being said, with 30 seconds and 2 time outs and Peyton Manning, I try to get some points.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 12:27 PM
This is what I pretty much thought, that is, this is what I speculated the logic to be. The Broncos have been a second half team all year, they almost always played better in the second half and this was the logic behind the knee down, get into the lockroom and make adjustments.

That being said, with 30 seconds and 2 time outs and Peyton Manning, I try to get some points.

I'm somewhat okay with not going for it at the end of the half. The old "go into the locker room with the lead". But not going for it tied at the end of regulation? Stupid.

Edit: just remembered it was tied at the half...

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 12:29 PM
I think you know what I meant though. I think when you start to play percentages there, you are no longer playing for the win...you are playing the odds to not lose.


Make no mistake. Every coach in the NFL plays the percentages on every single snap in every single game before they call a play.

bronco_diesel
01-14-2013, 12:33 PM
Make no mistake. Every coach in the NFL plays the percentages on every single snap in every single game before they call a play.

Like Sean Payton when he did the onside kick during the SB? What were the odds on that one? He didn't play the odds, he played for the win and got it.

You and I will just disagree with this. I see the logic in running off the clock...but in the context of the game, it was a mistake to give the ball back.

Mr.Meanie
01-14-2013, 12:33 PM
Agree with this thread. Now where is the thread about the 30 second kneel down with 2 timeouts left and game is tied? THAT was the worst ****ing call of the day, not the 3rd down run.

Rohirrim
01-14-2013, 12:38 PM
Agree with this thread. Now where is the thread about the 30 second kneel down with 2 timeouts left and game is tied? THAT was the worst ****ing call of the day, not the 3rd down run.

I don't think you're going to find anybody to take the "pro" position in that debate.

CEH
01-14-2013, 12:44 PM
They went with the option that gave them a 97% chance of winning the game. By definition, that IS going for the win.

99% when it was 3rd and 3 from the 30 yard line with 40 seconds left.
I agreed with the call at the time sitting in the stadium

General comment:

IMO, You don't change your coaching style once you get to the playoffs. If you want a guy that goes for it then you need a different guy to start the season with

What are the odds Denver makes a 3rd and 7? 99% no way. Denver was 7 for 17 in 3rd down so you are looking at 40%

El Minion
01-14-2013, 12:54 PM
"In a tie game, the Broncos started their final drive on their own 20 with 0:31 seconds remaining and two timeouts in hand. John Fox says, "Let's take it to overtime" and has potentially the greatest quarterback ever kneel down instead of trying for the game-winning field goal. That wasn't the first time the Broncos made this mistake. In fact, they made an eerily similar gaffe at the end of the first half. After missing a field goal and allowing a long Torrey Smith touchdown, the Broncos received the ball at the 20 with 0:36 seconds left and three timeouts. John Fox ran the ball one time and headed to the locker room. The only real explanation is that Fox believes momentum has predictive power. His thought process was probably that after two huge plays from Baltimore, the only thing that could come from an attempted 30-second drive is a game-changing mistake.


Let's look at the facts. The Broncos have Peyton Manning at the helm. They are playing at Mile High which adds about 5-yards to field goal range. The Broncos have 2+ timeouts in both situations. At the end of regulation, if it's tied, you go to overtime where there is a 50% chance of winning the game. According to Brian's win probability calculator, the initial win probability of the final drive was 54% (if you include the fact that it was played at Mile High).

I pulled all the drives that started between 20 and 40 seconds left in the game with 2+ timeouts, in a 3-point to 0-point deficit range (those ranges where a field goal would be the primary goal of the offense) since 2000 where the offense did not just kneel or run the ball into the end of the game. It was also limited to those drives that started inside a team's own 30-yard line. I found 21 such drives, here were the results:

32000

First thing to note is that 21 is not a huge sample size, but at least it provides a baseline for an analysis of the Broncos decision. Out of the 21 drives, seven resulted in a field goal attempt and only one of those was from over 60 yards. One drive resulted in a huge mistake and ultimate loss (Donovan McNabb threw an interception in a tie game which ultimately resulted in a Redskins game-winning field goal). For those 16 drives with no score (including the field goal misses), there is no difference to just kneeling down. In other words, there is no downside, both result in a 50% chance of winning the game as it goes to overtime.

I could have pulled similar situations at the end of the first half, which would have increased the sample size and allowed us a better look at the first half decision to just run the ball, but I wanted to focus especially on the end-of-game scenario where score was the primary factor. These results would suggest that if a team decided to go for the win, it would result in about a 57% chance of winning the game. Add Peyton Manning into the mix and that number certainly increases.

Last game of the season, can't hold anything back.

Oh, and the Atlanta Falcons started their final drive at the 28-yard line with 31 seconds left and two timeouts, and they kicked a go-ahead game-winning field goal (essentially the identical situation). C'mon, John.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2013/01/broncos-botch-final-drives.html




Fox Gets Conservative

Did the Denver coach’s risk-averse approach cost the Broncos a playoff victory? (http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/01/john_fox_broncos_ravens_did_the_coach_s_risk_avers e_approach_cost_denver.html)

By Brian Burke (http://www.slate.com/authors.brian_burke.html)|Posted Sunday, Jan. 13, 2013, at 10:21 PM ET

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/01/john_fox_broncos_ravens_did_the_coach_s_risk_avers e_approach_cost_denver/159361675.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large.jpg
Head coach John Fox of the Denver Broncos reacts against the Baltimore Ravens during the AFC Divisional Playoff Game at Sports Authority Field at Mile High on January 12, 2013 in Denver, Colorado.

Photo by Dustin Bradford/Getty Images.


For the second year in a row, Slate and Deadspin (http://deadspin.com/) are teaming up for a season-long NFL roundtable (http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/features/2012/nfl_2012/preseason/don_king_replacement_refs_roger_goodell_and_the_nf l_s_culture_of_lockouts_.html). Check back here each week as a rotating cast of football watchers discusses the weekend's key plays, coaching decisions, and traumatic brain injuries. And click here to play the latest episode of Slate’s sports podcast Hang Up and Listen (http://player.podtrac.com/player?autoplay=true&text=click+here+to+play+the+latest+episode+of+Slat e%e2%80%99s+sports+podcast+Hang+Up+and+Listen.&rgb=660033&h=300&type=link&feed=http%3a%2f%2ffeeds.feedburner.com%2fSlateHang UpAndListen).

NFL coaches will often refer to “playing the percentages.” But if there's one thing I've learned by studying strategic decisions, it's that coaches don't have a firm grasp of those percentages. And when anyone is uncertain of the odds, he'll fall back on the sure thing. That was the case with Broncos coach John Fox, who opted for the conservative approach at almost every opportunity (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/sports/football/broncos-see-victory-slip-away-after-conservative-calls.html?smid=tw-nytimessports&seid=auto&_r=3&) in Saturday’s playoff game against the Ravens. Even so, Fox is getting more criticism than he deserves. The Denver coach isn’t the reason the Broncos lost.

Fox’s first conservative decision came after a Baltimore touchdown tied the game at 21 near the end of the first half. Denver had a first-and-10 at its own 20 with 36 seconds left on the clock and all three timeouts—five more seconds and one more timeout than the Falcons had when they drove for the winning field goal on Sunday. Even so, the Broncos elected to call a throwaway run play and head for the locker room. In recent league history (since 2000), teams in that situation score slightly more than 10 percent of the time, the vast majority being field goals. Turnovers are definitely a risk, and they occur about 8 percent of the time on half-ending drives. But the bulk of those turnovers are on Hail Mary-type passes, which virtually never result in an opponent being able to score. Taken all together, the numbers say the scoring expectation was positive for Denver by a factor of 3-to-1. That's analytics-speak for, yeah, they should have tried to score there.

Advertisement


Fox’s next risk-averse decision came late in the fourth quarter. With the Broncos up 35-28, the Denver coach chose to run the ball five straight times. Fox's strategy succeeded in gaining one first down and forcing the Ravens to burn their last two timeouts. That left Denver with a third-and-7 at its own 47. Convert there and the game is over. Fox, though, decided to run rather than let Peyton Manning put the ball in the air. Ronnie Hillman was held to no gain, and the Broncos punted with 1:15 left on the clock.

Calling this running play was the safe, “sure thing” for the Broncos. Fox virtually ensured that he’d burn an additional 40 seconds of time and pin Baltimore deep in its own territory with about 70 seconds to play. There was also a slim chance that Denver could have converted with the run, winning the game outright. A pass would have been a gamble. A successful conversion would sew up the win, but an incomplete pass would have given Baltimore the ball with about 1:49 left. Passing also brings an extra risk of a turnover, either via an interception or a sack and a fumble.

For teams that need a touchdown to survive, time makes a big difference. With 1:09 to play, a team typically has a 13 percent chance of scoring a touchdown. With 1:49 to go, they have around a 26 percent chance. The choice, then, is between conceding Baltimore the 13 percent shot or gambling that you’ll either win the game outright or give Baltimore a 26 percent chance to win. League-wide, third-and-7 situations are converted 42 percent of the time. That means if Denver drops back to pass, Baltimore’s chance of winning is (1 - 0.42) * 0.26 = 0.15 = 15 percent. According to the math, then, Fox made the right call: Punting was, just barely, the right probabilistic call.

Conservative call no. 3 came at the end of regulation, after Jacoby Jones got past Denver safety Rahim Moore (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000125642/article/rahim-moore-denver-broncos-season-ended-on-me) to tie the game with his 70-yard touchdown catch. With 31 seconds to play and 2 timeouts, Fox repeated his decision from the end of the first half, electing to take a knee at his own 20 rather than let Peyton Manning try to maneuver into position for a game-winning field goal. It's undeniably risky, but the odds are strongly in the offense's favor there. Yes, the chances of scoring to win in regulation are small, but they significantly exceed the probability of a meaningful turnover.

But in Fox’s defense, the Broncos and Ravens weren’t playing in the Georgia Dome. The wind was in Denver’s face on the final drive of each half—kickoffs in that direction were regularly getting returned, while kickoffs the opposite way were sailing out of the end zone. Field-goal kickers also get less accurate in cold weather (http://www.advancednflstats.com/2012/01/temperature-and-field-goals.html), meaning the Broncos would’ve had to advance a long way down the field given the single-digit temperatures.

There was also the matter of Peyton Manning's arm. For whatever reason—possibly the cold weather having some effect on his grip—Manning did not appear to have the velocity needed for deep passes. Only 2 of his 43 attempts went more than 15 yards downfield. (Quarterbacks typically throw about 20 percent of their passes deep downfield, and Manning averaged 19 percent in the regular season.) So even if the probabilities suggest that Denver should’ve tried to score, you can understand why, given all these factors, Fox sat on the ball.

The coach’s final conservative decision was a bit more under the radar. In overtime, the Broncos faced a fourth-and-1 from their own 39, and Fox should have gone for the first down. Intuitively it might seem suicidal to go for it in your own territory in overtime, but the rules of sudden death make possession far more valuable than field position. Punting was the sure-thing option, virtually guaranteeing the Ravens get the ball near their own 20. Going for it is obviously an enormous gamble, but believe it or not, the odds favor it. Manning's short game was working well. He completed 68 percent of his passes on the year and 65 percent on Saturday. Fourth-and-1 situations are converted about 72 percent of the time, and given Manning's accuracy a quick pass would have been a high probability bet. The math works out so that, based on general averages, the punt would have given Denver a 49 percent chance of winning, but going for it would have worked out to a 53 percent chance.

But again, Fox didn’t necessarily do his team a disservice here. The Broncos were heavy favorites, having beaten the Ravens 34-17 in Baltimore just a few weeks earlier. The right overall approach for Denver was a “low-variance” strategy, relying on the team's overall superiority to methodically come out on top. The better team should avoid high-leverage situations that put the game at the mercy of a few big plays. Unfortunately for John Fox, Baltimore succeeded by pursuing a high-variance strategy. They went for the big play time after time, getting touchdown passes of 59, 32, and 70 yards. That’s exactly what a big underdog needs to do to win.

Fox's conservatism may have cost his team slightly, but he didn’t decide the outcome of the game. The effect of these four calls was swamped by the impact of a few big plays, any one of which would have given Denver the win had it turned out differently.




Brian Burke is a former Navy fighter pilot and the founder of the website Advanced NFL Stats (http://www.advancednflstats.com/). He is a regular contributor at the New York Times' Fifth Down (http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/author/brian-burke/) and the Washington Post's The Insider (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2012/09/06/even-statistically-preseason-provides-no-clue-to-regular-season-performance/).

Heyneck
01-14-2013, 12:54 PM
It was the right call. Specially with a coach as Fox. We lost the game not on 1 play. We screwed up a lot. All over. It was a team loss. Only Holiday and Wood came to play, and unfortunately as is the routine, the QB get most of the blame.

On a side note, I do think that with another type of coach, say Shanny,... I would bet the mortage we go for it.

Rohirrim
01-14-2013, 12:59 PM
Fox Gets Conservative

Did the Denver coach’s risk-averse approach cost the Broncos a playoff victory? (http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/01/john_fox_broncos_ravens_did_the_coach_s_risk_avers e_approach_cost_denver.html)

By Brian Burke (http://www.slate.com/authors.brian_burke.html)|Posted Sunday, Jan. 13, 2013, at 10:21 PM ET

The Insider[/URL].[/I]

I would also add that Fox didn't have his #1 and #2 RBs. That, along with the weather, would also factor into the decisions.

Al Wilson
01-14-2013, 01:00 PM
If you attempt to pass the ball and go for getting the first down and then getting it then your opponent has a 0% chance of winning. Going for the first down than giving your opponent a chance at coming back is always the best option. Therefore, you and John Fox fail. End of the ****ing story.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 01:04 PM
It was the right call. Specially with a coach as Fox. We lost the game not on 1 play. We screwed up a lot. All over. It was a team loss. Only Holiday and Wood came to play, and unfortunately as is the routine, the QB get most of the blame.

On a side note, I do think that with another type of coach, say Shanny,... I would bet the mortage we go for it.

OT should not have existed.

The entire offense put together a game winning 10 play 88 yard drive late in the 4th. Adams broke up a 4th down pass to seal it. Had this been a win everyone would be calling that the drive of 2000s. Moore stops that reception and its a win. Fox put Moore in that position by giving ravens an opportunity with the conservative BS.

Bottom line is with 2 minutes in the game up a TD with the ball and they flat out choked. I don't want an HC that is scared or doesn't trust his offense. His reasoning and comments are baffling to me.

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 01:06 PM
If you attempt to pass the ball and go for getting the first down and then getting it then your opponent has a 0% chance of winning.

If you attempt to run the ball and go for getting the first down and then getting it, then your opponent has a 0% chance of winning.

Two can play that game.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 01:07 PM
I would also add that Fox didn't have his #1 and #2 RBs. That, along with the weather, would also factor into the decisions.

So no 1 or 2 RB, he decides to put the fate of the game in the RBs hands? No 1 or 2 I'm trying to get that 1st down another way. Who says manning needs to throw an incomplete? He could've just fallen to the ground if no one is open.

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 01:08 PM
Who says manning needs to throw an incomplete? He could've just fallen to the ground if no one is open.

Except every time he got touched on Saturday, he seemed to fumble the ball.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 01:08 PM
If you attempt to run the ball and go for getting the first down and then getting it, then your opponent has a 0% chance of winning.

Two can play that game.

How many 3rd and 7s are converted by running the ball in the NFL? How many are converted by passing? Ravens were looking run the entire drive.

The priority of that run play was to take time off the clock. It wasn't to get the 1st down.

Al Wilson
01-14-2013, 01:12 PM
If you attempt to run the ball and go for getting the first down and then getting it, then your opponent has a 0% chance of winning.

Two can play that game.
It was 3 & 7 not 3 & 2 or 3 & 1 sherlock. The chances of getting a first down on an obvious running down on a 3 & 7 is slim to none. Passing the ball would have been the better option.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 01:13 PM
Except every time he got touched on Saturday, he seemed to fumble the ball.

In that situation id think he'd fall to the ground before getting touched. All this proves is a coaching staff that didnt trust in their offense. Kneeling down with 2 timeouts confirmed that

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 01:19 PM
How many 3rd and 7s are converted by running the ball in the NFL? How many are converted by passing? Ravens were looking run the entire drive.

The priority of that run play was to take time off the clock. It wasn't to get the 1st down.

It was 3 & 7 not 3 & 2 or 3 & 1 sherlock. The chances of getting a first down on an obvious running down on a 3 & 7 is slim to none. Passing the ball would have been the better option.

Normally I'd agree, but in this case, what if Manning told you that they called for a pass, but Baltimore was in a dime defense and was playing pass, so he audibled to a run?

TonyR
01-14-2013, 01:19 PM
Fox's conservatism may have cost his team slightly, but he didn’t decide the outcome of the game. The effect of these four calls was swamped by the impact of a few big plays, any one of which would have given Denver the win had it turned out differently.


Good find. Brian Burke does good work and his analysis and conclusion pretty much end this argument. Adn yet people will still argue...

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 01:20 PM
In that situation id think he'd fall to the ground before getting touched.

He didn't see either hit coming that caused the prior fumbles.

El Minion
01-14-2013, 01:25 PM
It was 3 & 7 not 3 & 2 or 3 & 1 sherlock. The chances of getting a first down on an obvious running down on a 3 & 7 is slim to none. Passing the ball would have been the better option.

From Brian Burke (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3781285&postcount=92)

Fox’s next risk-averse decision came late in the fourth quarter. With the Broncos up 35-28, the Denver coach chose to run the ball five straight times. Fox's strategy succeeded in gaining one first down and forcing the Ravens to burn their last two timeouts. That left Denver with a third-and-7 at its own 47. Convert there and the game is over. Fox, though, decided to run rather than let Peyton Manning put the ball in the air. Ronnie Hillman was held to no gain, and the Broncos punted with 1:15 left on the clock.

Calling this running play was the safe, “sure thing” for the Broncos. Fox virtually ensured that he’d burn an additional 40 seconds of time and pin Baltimore deep in its own territory with about 70 seconds to play. There was also a slim chance that Denver could have converted with the run, winning the game outright. A pass would have been a gamble. A successful conversion would sew up the win, but an incomplete pass would have given Baltimore the ball with about 1:49 left. Passing also brings an extra risk of a turnover, either via an interception or a sack and a fumble.

For teams that need a touchdown to survive, time makes a big difference. With 1:09 to play, a team typically has a 13 percent chance of scoring a touchdown. With 1:49 to go, they have around a 26 percent chance. The choice, then, is between conceding Baltimore the 13 percent shot or gambling that you’ll either win the game outright or give Baltimore a 26 percent chance to win. League-wide, third-and-7 situations are converted 42 percent of the time. That means if Denver drops back to pass, Baltimore’s chance of winning is (1 - 0.42) * 0.26 = 0.15 = 15 percent. According to the math, then, Fox made the right call: Punting was, just barely, the right probabilistic call.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 01:31 PM
From Brian Burke (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3781285&postcount=92)

What does it say about scoring a TD in seconds twice in a game?

Id take the 0% chance of winning converting that 1st down. Never know of you get it or not but not trying kills playoff teams. That's regular season ball.

Bronco Yoda
01-14-2013, 01:36 PM
No guts, No glory!

Print it up John and stick it everywhere. Start with Fox's bathroom mirror, shirts, office wall, etc.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 01:41 PM
IMO it was a coaching staff that was playing by a not to lose handbook instead of ADJUSTING their thinking based on the elements of the game. By that I mean Baltimore showed several times in the game that time and distance was not a factor in stopping them from scoring a TD. Give them 30 seconds? No problem. That ravens sideline was silent before that 3rd and 7. As soon as it wasn't converted they showed enthusiasm and life.

It was the right call in some games. It was the wrong call in a game where the opposing team showed numerous times they could score at will. That's when you adapt and adjust. An elite coach would make that adjustment.

Al Wilson
01-14-2013, 01:44 PM
Normally I'd agree, but in this case, what if Manning told you that they called for a pass, but Baltimore was in a dime defense and was playing pass, so he audibled to a run?
Doesn't matter. Going for the pass would have been the better option. I'd rather kill the other team's chances of getting a touchdown by simply passing for the first down. A playaction pass would've got us the first down. Fox's strategy and conservative approach finally got the best of him. And at the end of the day it is the fans that pay these retards that have to take it the hardest.

Al Wilson
01-14-2013, 01:48 PM
From Brian Burke (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3781285&postcount=92)
The Ravens were scoring at will. This right there is even more proof that Denver should have passed on the 3rd and 7 to kill the Ravens chances. As I mentioned, being a conservative coach has its consequences and it couldn't have a come in a worse game than this. Fox deserves it for being a wuss. Conservative coaching doesn't win you championships; sorry to burst your bubbles fellow fans.

winstoncup bronco
01-14-2013, 01:48 PM
Your logic is more than just a little bit flawed here. If we passed instead of ran in that situation and lost would that have been the "right call"?

Yes, it would be the right call to the extent that we tried to WIN the game, tried to close it out. If you don't convert, THEN you hand the game to your defense, knowing you did what you could. What we did was wave the white flag. We dared them to beat us, instead of us just beating them, and look what it got us.

The fact that we ran off that time is moot because they scored on us in 40 seconds anyway. And might I also add, even if the pass on 3rd & 7 is incomplete giving Baltimore more time, I doubt they get desperate and heave the ball in that situation. We'd have a much better chance at managing the field than guarding against a pass play that was killing us all day to begin with.

It's just amazing we spent all of this money on a QB that will probably win MVP, and we can't even try to convert a 3rd & 7 to win a playoff game. Just pitiful.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 01:53 PM
From Brian Burke (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3781285&postcount=92)

This is so simple. The proof is right here. And yet, as I suggested would happen, people keep arguing.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 01:54 PM
The Ravens were scoring at will. This right there is even more proof that Denver should have passed on the 3rd and 7 to kill the Ravens chances. As I mentioned, being a conservative coach has its consequences and it couldn't have a come in a worse game than this. Fox deserves it for being a wuss. Conservative coaching doesn't win you championships; sorry to burst your bubbles fellow fans.

Exactly my point. Ravens already showed fox they don't need time to score. They showed the broncos that distance to the endzone meant nothing.

The most basic way of describing it is taking the ball out of your own hands and giving the other team a shot. It's not really about whether they would've passed for a 1st, threw an incomplete, or even an int. it's the fact they didnt even TRY that is the scary part. No team will ever win a SB when you have that mentality.

Books percentages history tell you to run, the way the game was unfolding it was telling you to pass.

ScottXray
01-14-2013, 01:55 PM
I 100% agree that this was the right decision. It is a no-brainer. The odds of Moore (or someone else on Defense) completely crapping the bed were extremely low. Unfortunately, it happened, but it doesn't mean they made the wrong call.

My major issue with Fox were the friggin kneel-downs at the end of the halves, particularly the one at the end of the game. So cowardly. My issue with Manning was I thought he audibled into too many runs in the second half and OT. They just seemed to let the passing game get totally out of rhythm. I don't know why he kept running on 2nd and 1. Why not take a shot downfield in that situation? Ughhhhh. Worst. Game. Ever.

The decision to run on 3rd and seven was correct. The decision to run up the MIDDLE of the Defense with Hester was questionable considering we had already been stuffed there twice. Two back set with Two TE and maybe Hillman to the outside might have had a chance. Wrong personnel were in to have a chance of the first down, with Baltimore ALSO knowing the percentages. Might as well have run a Manning sneak.

It did run the clock...but there was almost zero chance of converting the first down.

Drunken.Broncoholic
01-14-2013, 02:01 PM
Harbaugh adjusted to Holliday. He didnt keep kicking it to him after what he saw. Fox on the other hand didnt make the adjustment. Sure the ravens only needed 40 seconds to score on me already, the percentages say they won't do it again. That type of thinking ends up in losses.

BroncoBeavis
01-14-2013, 02:07 PM
No guts, No glory!

Print it up John and stick it everywhere. Start with Fox's bathroom mirror, shirts, office wall, etc.

Maybe Pull the Trigger?

Popps
01-14-2013, 02:11 PM
If the 3rd and 7 call was the only ultraconservative, play-not-to-lose call... I might buy into this thread.

But, when you repeatedly chose not to be proactive in deciding your own fate, this is what happens. There were at least 4 major intersections in this game where we could have chosen to use our 90 million dollar QB and instead... played scared.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-14-2013, 02:30 PM
If the 3rd and 7 call was the only ultraconservative, play-not-to-lose call... I might buy into this thread.

But, when you repeatedly chose not to be proactive in deciding your own fate, this is what happens. There were at least 4 major intersections in this game where we could have chosen to use our 90 million dollar QB and instead... played scared.

I dunno that, in this case, it qualifies. When we punted, the ravens chances were slim to none. Unfortunately they got it done on a fluke, but it wasnt like we were giving it to them with 2:30 left and 3 time outs.

Tombstone RJ
01-14-2013, 03:21 PM
This is so simple. The proof is right here. And yet, as I suggested would happen, people keep arguing.

With how crappy the defense was playing there's legit reasons to speculate on this topic.

broncobum6162
01-14-2013, 03:46 PM
We should have thrown a high percentage play action pass on 2nd down. That would have gotten us our 1st down. Ratbirds sitting all over the run.. We played not to lose which is as effective as the prevent defense. Either way you end up losing which we did or as some have correctly called it "Martyball" gosh how I miss his daze in KC&,SD......end of discussion.

Bronco Yoda
01-14-2013, 04:05 PM
This might or might not have been mentioned by now... but if not. Some have questioned if Foxed made the 3rd & 7 call or manning checked down to run. Fox was on the 'Fan' today and clarified that He (Fox) made the call (3rd & 7) not Manning. But Manning checked down to the run on the 3rd & 5 at the end of the first half.

broncobum6162
01-14-2013, 04:17 PM
This might or might not have been mentioned by now... but if not. Some have questioned if Foxed made the 3rd & 7 call or manning checked down to run. Fox was on the 'Fan' today and clarified that He (Fox) made the call (3rd & 7) not Manning. But Manning checked down to the run on the 3rd & 5 at the end of the first half.

Why.....after we can barely make 3rd and 2 what makes him think w can make 3rd and 5. As much as we want to believe we are a run first team we arent. We have to pass to pass to set it up. Especially w Moreno and Hillman. Mc Coy and evidently now Manning havnt figured that out......

extralife
01-14-2013, 04:20 PM
I said the same thing in one of the innumerable other threads. I agree with the call, I agree with the thread. We've won games like this this season. Our pass coverage and pass rush were two of the strengths of the team. Trust them to get the job done in a situation where the Ravens had virtually no chance of winning the game. They failed us horribly. Can't coach through failure like that, you just do what puts your team in the best position to win. The goal is to win the game, not pretend your making a questionable call makes you a bigger man and avails you of any of the blame for a loss. It takes more "balls" to make the right call in the face of a sea of idiots.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 04:23 PM
Why.....after we can barely make 3rd and 2 what makes him think w can make 3rd and 5. As much as we want to believe we are a run first team we arent. We have to pass to pass to set it up. Especially w Moreno and Hillman. Mc Coy and evidently now Manning havnt figured that out......

One can only assume that Manning saw something. His read was that run was the way to go. Either Baltimore reacted well or the Broncos executed poorly. Or both. All said, I hated it.

rbackfactory80
01-14-2013, 04:25 PM
IMHO, the worst running plays were handing the ball off to Hillman on 2nd or 3rd and inches and still not getting the first down.

how about a QB sneak? Anyone think of that option?

Sneak isn't an option because neck injuries I would think.

broncocalijohn
01-14-2013, 04:35 PM
So no 1 or 2 RB, he decides to put the fate of the game in the RBs hands? No 1 or 2 I'm trying to get that 1st down another way. Who says manning needs to throw an incomplete? He could've just fallen to the ground if no one is open.

The play wasn't necessarily to get a first down as much as it was to eat up the clock. That was a guaranty that as long as Hilman doesn't fumble or go out of bounds, the game loses about 40 seconds. You think a QB throws a ball thinking it is going to be incomplete? How about a perfect throw and the receiver drops it? I know they can go for a safe swing out pass that gives a better chance at a first down but I believe the option of killing 40 seconds as a 100% sure bet while the first down was a much smaller percentage.

winstoncup bronco
01-14-2013, 05:23 PM
I said the same thing in one of the innumerable other threads. I agree with the call, I agree with the thread. We've won games like this this season. Our pass coverage and pass rush were two of the strengths of the team. Trust them to get the job done in a situation where the Ravens had virtually no chance of winning the game. They failed us horribly. Can't coach through failure like that, you just do what puts your team in the best position to win. The goal is to win the game, not pretend your making a questionable call makes you a bigger man and avails you of any of the blame for a loss. It takes more "balls" to make the right call in the face of a sea of idiots.

Pass coverage and pass rush failed us the entire game, so the best strategy is to force the Ravens to do what they were doing best: stone our pass rush and have Flacco play pitch and catch downfield. Perfect.

Bronco Yoda
01-14-2013, 06:10 PM
What? We can't even get a little creative other than these run up the middle? Give me a reverse if you got nothing in the creative bin. It was like watching a s l o w m o v i n g car crash.

Crush2
01-14-2013, 06:15 PM
I will be rooting for you guys next week.

http://cdn2.sbnation.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/6524387/awyqi.0_standard_730.0.jpg

Cito Pelon
01-14-2013, 06:27 PM
Well, I figure just in general it was a poorly coached game on O and D.

Coach Fox is gonna be on 104.3 in a few minute talking to Big Al, we'll see what he has to say.

Cito Pelon
01-14-2013, 06:42 PM
Buzz off, Fox. Says again the guys were "shell shocked", so makes the analogy again of "surviving for the next round". I consider that a little weak, tell your guys to suck it up for this round, tell them to get their game face on.

BroncoBeavis
01-14-2013, 06:47 PM
Why.....after we can barely make 3rd and 2 what makes him think w can make 3rd and 5. As much as we want to believe we are a run first team we arent. We have to pass to pass to set it up. Especially w Moreno and Hillman. Mc Coy and evidently now Manning havnt figured that out......

Not an issue here at all. On 3rd and 2 the D stacks against the run. Probably would've been a good time to pass if that were not against the McFoxball religion. But on 3rd and 5 Peyton probably saw a pass defense he didn't like so checked to a run that might work if the right people drop into coverage.

RaiderH8r
01-14-2013, 06:52 PM
It was the wrong call. How do I know? We lost.

We had them down and ready to stick the dagger in. You go for the kill shot. Period. We had multiple opportunities to put the game away and didn't. We took the knee and most people knew n their guts we just gave them another shot at life.

Cito Pelon
01-14-2013, 07:01 PM
Fox just said the 3rd and 7 was his call, PM didn't audible into it. So we can put that to rest. Nevertheless, I thought they were too conservative on that series. If all you need is one 1st down, at least TRY to get it.

We saw the conservative method almost backfire a few games in the reg season where the opponent was given a last gasp, Denver had to recover a few onside kicks to keep the opponent from a last drive.

Hulamau
01-14-2013, 07:04 PM
I think the loss of Moreno was a major factor in that final call. Hillman was going down on first contact. PM had to know, by that point, that he had no play action to work with. It was going to be a straight toss, and probably a heavy blitz. I don't know what the Ratbirds were playing at that moment, but I assume it was at least a nickle package. Maybe even dime? I'm guessing that everything he saw on that field screamed "RUN." Does anybody know the routes that were called on that play? I'm guessing it would be something designed to empty the middle and pull off Lewis? So what do you do? Bubble screen? Dump off to a back? Screen? Flat? Hook route? You've got two out of three chances that something bad is going to happen, and an incomplete doesn't burn any clock.

Agree that losing Moreno at half really effect the Offense flow and rhythm the whole second half until they got it back in sync some of the last two drives learing up to the DT touchdown.

But on that TD drive to DT there was no Moreno and we still managed to combine effective passing and running to go 91 yards and score from deep in their redzone!

And using this reason for why Fox had Manning take a knee with 32 seconds left and 2 TOs from our own 20 is all the more reason why we should have gone for the much simpler 1st down when it was right in front of us and when the Ravens D had was flagging a bit, particular their secondary, after the long 91 yard drive and a quick stop of Ravens O giving us the ball back with something like 3:20 to go!

You get taht last first down and no more scoring or moving up and down the field would ever be necessary and any possibility, however remote it may have appeared on a stats spread sheet would have been irrelevant!

This is what I fault Foxy for, they didnt even consider it. He was conservative not going for it with 30 seconds left in the first half and two TOs then as well trying to at least get in FG range again to allow Prater to make it a 3 point lead at half .. which .. as it turns out would have won it in regulation as well inspite of Flaccos 7 yard Hail Mary TD!!

His first and last instinct was 'to play the safer odds' again with 3:20 to go and a 7 point lead on the line and finally yet again he abdicated for all these seemingly sound and careful rationals expressed in the opening post of this thread! .. But each one of those was the WRONG decision.

It robbed of of three golden opportunites to either put points on the board at the very end of the half or at end of regulation and preventing any more scoring even being needed if we go for a single first down and mean it!

Fox even admitted he wasnt even TRYING to get a first down, only trying to run a bit of time off the clock and eat of their last TOs.

Listen, I like Fox a lot and wouldn;t dream of suggesting he be fired over this, that is idiotic.... But I do want him to own up to just maybe making a mistake in his calls here ... three chances to score or close out the game with PMFM behind center and he takes the calculated conservative way out EACH time!!
'
There are games when the flow if it and how it has unfolded and the given opponent would make me agree with his philosophy .. this wasnt one of them. Its exactly what I cautioned about in several post game threads after we won big but allowed the other team to score multiple times and made the score a lot closer than it should have been or the how well we trashed the team!

I was concerned for the habit and prescedent set in teh players mind.. That tighten up and play not to lose rather than knowing when to go for it and at least do your best to get a first down,.

some of you act like it is a forgone conclusion Manning woulkd have thrown an INT if we only had 7 yards for a first ( actually I would have told him to mix one run and two passes into those three plays .. whatever mix Manning felt the defense and the circumstance called for to get a SAFE first down.

Any passes could only be those where it was our guy or nobody catching the ball! The Ravens knew what we were going to do, Flacco was warming up and so was their FG kicker on the sidelines before we even started the last series of 3 dive plays and a cloud of dust and then punt!

Stats are fine and whatever cold hard football 'fact' you want to pull out is fine for debates but when the game was clearly on the line and we had a golden chance to NOT give the ball back to Flacco who has the best deep long ball in the NFL and had torched us three or four times on long balls already including two TDs.... it was the riskiest play it turns out to NOT PLAY TO WIN right then and there!


The Odds of Manning risking a difficult and dangerous throw in that particular circumstance was a bout ZERO!.. the odds of him getting a first down when he tells everyone on the team 'Play this play like its your last and we end this game" I will take that chance any day of the year!!

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 07:04 PM
It was the wrong call. How do I know? We lost.


For the 100th time, what if we passed it and still lost? By definition, that would mean there was no right call.

Horrible logic to pick that one non-scoring play and say that that's why we lost.

R8R H8R
01-14-2013, 07:07 PM
Regardless of what you or I think, Elway fully backs Fox on this call and the kneeling down at the end of regulation.

So some of you can ***** & moan all you want, but Fox is going to be back next year, as he should, and he has said he will do it the same under the same circumstances. So deal with it.

Beantown Bronco
01-14-2013, 07:07 PM
Stats are fine and whatever cold hard football 'fact' you want to pull out is fine for debates but when the game was clearly on the line and we had a golden chance to NOT give the ball back to Flacco

3rd and 7 in that weather is hardly a "golden chance".

The Odds of Manning risking a difficult and dangerous throw in that particular circumstance was a bout ZERO!.. the odds of him getting a first down when he tells everyone on the team 'Play this play like its your last and we end this game" I will take that chance any day of the year!!

Zero? Please. There's always a risk of a tipped ball, etc. Just look at the pick 6 and our last offensive play.

Bronco Yoda
01-14-2013, 07:09 PM
That's the problem. Fox got away with this mindset too many times this year. Think how many games we were up multiple scores this year only to hang on with teams able to tie or go for the win at the end. Sooner or later your D is going to break.... and it did.

RaiderH8r
01-14-2013, 07:09 PM
For the 100th time, what if we passed it and still lost? By definition, that would mean there was no right call.

Horrible logic to pick that one non-scoring play and say that that's why we lost.

It was a loser's call and it bit us in the ass. Fox just made this club a cautionary tale for the ages. It takes a special kind of ****ed to pull that off. Between Fox and Rahim they went full retard.

At least throwing it puts the game in the $96 million man's hands. Isn't clutch the whole reason we got Manning? If Fox can't find the nut to pass the ball after blowing $96 million on the Bioneckle then WTF is he doing with this club anyway?

R8R H8R
01-14-2013, 07:17 PM
For the 100th time, what if we passed it and still lost? By definition, that would mean there was no right call.

Horrible logic to pick that one non-scoring play and say that that's why we lost.

Right because it's not logic. It's 100% emotion, which we know can be irrational when taken to extremes. One doesn't have to agree with a decision, however they should understand why it is made.

You are right -what if we passed and it fell incomplete? Now the Ravens have 40 more seconds to work with; and what if they still get the bomb to Torrey Smith? Then this whole board would be *****ing about how Fox let the Ravens have more time to beat us.

Fox played the percentages, and the secondary blew it. That is why they tied the game. Period.

Cito Pelon
01-14-2013, 07:19 PM
3rd and 7 in that weather is hardly a "golden chance".



Zero? Please. There's always a risk of a tipped ball, etc. Just look at the pick 6 and our last offensive play.

Well yeah, it goes both ways. I'm sure it's been mentioned that it wasn't just the 3rd and 7, but the plays prior to it where a more aggressive attitude to get a 1st down would have won the game.

RaiderH8r
01-14-2013, 07:22 PM
Well yeah, it goes both ways. I'm sure it's been mentioned that it wasn't just the 3rd and 7, but the plays prior to it where a more aggressive attitude to get a 1st down would have won the game.

Exactly. That first down=game over. Show some nut, take the initiative and win the ****ing game. If Fox can't have enough faith in Manning to put the game away we should get ourselves a game manager and a new stable of running backs to tote the rock 60 times a game.

R8R H8R
01-14-2013, 07:32 PM
Well yeah, it goes both ways. I'm sure it's been mentioned that it wasn't just the 3rd and 7, but the plays prior to it where a more aggressive attitude to get a 1st down would have won the game.

Pardon me- MAY have. May have won the game. Not would have won the game. More aggressive plays may have also dropped incomplete or worse.

Fox played the percentages and his secondary blew it. That is what we should really be *****ing about.

As I said earlier, Fox is our coach next year, and he has said he will do it again under similar circumstances, and nothing you or I say will change that.

TonyR
01-14-2013, 07:45 PM
Well yeah, it goes both ways. I'm sure it's been mentioned that it wasn't just the 3rd and 7, but the plays prior to it where a more aggressive attitude to get a 1st down would have won the game.

Yes, as has been mentioned multiple times, many of the decisions can and should be questioned (FG attempt, kneeling down at half time, kneeling down at the end of regulation, etc.). But this isn't one of them.

troya900
01-14-2013, 07:53 PM
So fckface fox fails to own up to his nutless decisions and then reaffirms in the future that he WILL MAKE THE SAME CALLS and half you fox nuthuggers are totally cool with that? Just pathetic. You put the game in the hands of your HOF QB and trust he makes the smart decision to throw or take the sack if nothings there. For God's sake at least TRY for a first down instead of 3 runs up Koppen's ass.

Cito Pelon
01-14-2013, 08:54 PM
Pardon me- MAY have. May have won the game. Not would have won the game. More aggressive plays may have also dropped incomplete or worse.

Fox played the percentages and his secondary blew it. That is what we should really be *****ing about.

As I said earlier, Fox is our coach next year, and he has said he will do it again under similar circumstances, and nothing you or I say will change that.

Dunno man. I'd have liked to see more aggression there in a playoff game. You can't keep letting a team hang around. You put them away at home, and you put them away as fast as you can.

Cito Pelon
01-14-2013, 08:59 PM
So fckface fox fails to own up to his nutless decisions and then reaffirms in the future that he WILL MAKE THE SAME CALLS and half you fox nuthuggers are totally cool with that? Just pathetic. You put the game in the hands of your HOF QB and trust he makes the smart decision to throw or take the sack if nothings there. For God's sake at least TRY for a first down instead of 3 runs up Koppen's ass.

I've heard a lot of people say Manning should have shown the balls to override what Fox wanted to do, should have said, "Bull****, we're gonna put them away right now."

Al Wilson
01-14-2013, 09:21 PM
Regardless of what you or I think, Elway fully backs Fox on this call and the kneeling down at the end of regulation.

So some of you can ***** & moan all you want, but Fox is going to be back next year, as he should, and he has said he will do it the same under the same circumstances. So deal with it.
Obviously Elway is going to back Fox infront of the media and public you ****ing genius. What is he supposed to do ? Put him on the ****ing spot and create controversy and noise for everyone?

MplsBronco
01-14-2013, 09:53 PM
Just rewatched the game. Even Dierdork and the other guy were SHOCKED that Manning handed off on 3rd down. Said the Ravens couldn't have hoped for anything better after giving up a first down already. Called it VERY conservative and proved to be prophetic.

I don't get all this play the percentages crap. Myopic bull****. You have the opportunity to end the game right then and there. You have to take your shot. And Fox has the gall to come out and say no regrets??? Sorry, but not looking forward to the future with this assclown and Mannings diminishing physical capabilities. Things are not bright, hate to break it to many of you.

extralife
01-14-2013, 09:55 PM
so let me get this straight: you are using DAN DEIRDORF to back up your point?

MplsBronco
01-14-2013, 09:57 PM
so let me get this straight: you are using DAN DEIRDORF to back up your point?

Yeah, I know. Once great player, been around the game forever. Seen more games, situations than your condescending ass. The guy is a dope but he knows a thing or two about the game.

R8R H8R
01-14-2013, 10:21 PM
Obviously Elway is going to back Fox infront of the media and public you ****ing genius. What is he supposed to do ? Put him on the ****ing spot and create controversy and noise for everyone?

Obviously, and not surprising, my point went right over your head. He also backs him privately because if he didn't, he would have asked Fox prior to the PC to take some responsibility and concede that he may do it differently the next time the situation arises.

Fox said no such thing today! Instead, he said he will play it the same way again in the future 10 times out of 10. That is how I know Elway backs him privately you ****ing genius.

Btw and FWIIW, a guy does not have to agree with the decision to back him up.

Al Wilson
01-14-2013, 10:28 PM
Obviously, and not surprising, my point went right over your head. He also backs him privately because if he didn't, he would have asked Fox prior to the PC to take some responsibility and concede that he may do it differently the next time the situation arises.

Fox said no such thing today! Instead, he said he will play it the same way again in the future 10 times out of 10. That is how I know Elway backs him privately you ****ing genius.

Btw and FWIIW, a guy does not have to agree with the decision to back him up.
Whatever he says to the media isn't the same behind closed doors.

And if he did not back Fox it doesn't mean that he told him you have to take blame for it infront of the media. Why would he do that??

If you want to believe whatever he or Elway said to the media then that's your choice. But, I hardly believe Elway backed him 100% privately. Elway knows this game, and I'm sure a lot was said closed doors. You, on the other hand, believe whatever Fox or Elway say to the public.

Bronco Yoda
01-14-2013, 10:34 PM
I've heard a lot of people say Manning should have shown the balls to override what Fox wanted to do, should have said, "Bull****, we're gonna put them away right now."

You could see that Manning was a little shocked as well. When they were kicking the extra point he was still standing there with his hat on. No helmet, no playbook, no huddling up with the guys. Nope. They were all caught with their pants down.

extralife
01-14-2013, 11:03 PM
Yeah, I know. Once great player, been around the game forever. Seen more games, situations than your condescending ass. The guy is a dope but he knows a thing or two about the game.

you want to know who else has seen more games than your or my ass? John Fox!

next.

R8R H8R
01-14-2013, 11:12 PM
[QUOTE]Whatever he says to the media isn't the same behind closed doors.

True, but I am not arguing that in my post.

And if he did not back Fox it doesn't mean that he told him you have to take blame for it infront of the media. Why would he do that??


I didn't say take the blame, I said take some responsibility. There is a difference, and coaches do it often, including Fox, but he did no such thing today. Instead, he said he would do it again.

If you want to believe whatever he or Elway said to the media then that's your choice. But, I hardly believe Elway backed him 100% privately. Elway knows this game, and I'm sure a lot was said closed doors. You, on the other hand, believe whatever Fox or Elway say to the public

I do, but this is where you are not getting my point: you do not have to agree with someone's decision to back them up 100% to make that decision, now and in the future. Meaning Elway may not agree with Fox's conservative calls sometimes, but he sure as hell isn't going to tell him to do otherwise. Because f he did, Fox wouldn't have said he will do the same again.

Al Wilson
01-14-2013, 11:22 PM
I do, but this is where you are not getting my point: you do not have to agree with someone's decision to back them up 100% to make that decision, now and in the future. Meaning Elway may not agree with Fox's conservative calls sometimes, but he sure as hell isn't going to tell him to do otherwise. Because f he did, Fox wouldn't have said he will do the same again.
Fair enough. At the end of the day it bit us in the ass, whether you like it or not. Even if Elway does back him as a coach and wishes not to interfere with playcalling and such, I'm sure Peyton will have more say in those situations next time around. Fox should stick to defense and never have a say on offense. His defense got their asses handed to them.

R8R H8R
01-14-2013, 11:37 PM
Fair enough. At the end of the day it bit us in the ass, whether you like it or not. Even if Elway does back him as a coach and wishes not to interfere with playcalling and such, I'm sure Peyton will have more say in those situations next time around. Fox should stick to defense and never have a say on offense. His defense got their asses handed to them.

Btw, I didn't like the decision to run it at the time, but I guess the difference is, I completely understand it. I also disagree with you that in itself was the very play that bit us in the butt. No, they tied the game because our secondary failed us ( or specifically Moore, if you prefer) in a situation that the Ravens had less than a 5% chance of winning the game.

Honestly, that defensive breakdown is what chars my butt, and probably will throughout the offseason.

Al Wilson
01-14-2013, 11:49 PM
Btw, I didn't like the decision to run it at the time, but I guess the difference is, I completely understand it. I also disagree with you that in itself was the very play that bit us in the butt. No, they tied the game because our secondary failed us ( or specifically Moore, if you prefer) in a situation that the Ravens had less than a 5% chance of winning the game.

Honestly, that defensive breakdown is what chars my butt, and probably will throughout the offseason.
If our defense was having a great game then running the ball on that down might have been ok at the time, but the defense was getting torched. Bailey failed us more than Moore did. My overall view is that John Fox's conservativness in the game is what bit us in the ass. You have the greatest QB of all time with a chance to kill the game, and yet you don't give him a chance to end it and hand it back to your defense that has been getting owned all game? That didn't make sense to me. Honestly, I wish if Fox had some balls in him like Shanahan ... as gutsy as he was, he would always want to end the game with his offense when he had a chance.

Hulamau
01-15-2013, 12:08 AM
Normally I'd agree, but in this case, what if Manning told you that they called for a pass, but Baltimore was in a dime defense and was playing pass, so he audibled to a run?

Because that is NOT what happened that's Why!!! Foxy admitted today in the post mort that on that series in question his main objective was indeed to drain clock time and not so much to get a first down!!

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000125374/article/denver-broncos-john-fox-coached-not-to-lose-game

Nothing strange or unpredictable here folks, its Fox ball, conservative to the core at the end of games and sometimes at the end of halves and HIGHLY predictable such that he would run the same series of plays 10 times out of 10 times as he also noted today, regardless of past outcomes the previous nine times!!! I think that quote should define the word 'STUBBORN" in Websters new edition dictionary!

As the beginning of this thread notes, there are some defensible reasons and historical stats supporting such a philosophy. And in many game situations it may well be the right call and has been, but you HAVE to know where you are in a game of this magnitude and how the momentum and time element is either working for you or against going so 'safe' and playing not to lose as Foxy clearly did.

The problem is, those stats are not taking into account context and the moment in the game, the type of game ... freezing cold long game against a seasoned playoff hardened opponent with a strong armed Hail Mary completing QB that you are trying to punt the game back over too with 1:15 left after you fail to both get the first down AND not run out the clock leaving enough time for said LONG BALL Chukker Frozen Joe to heave at least two, maybe three, long bombs! The Ravens will take those odds any day of the week thank you and made it work out fine .. with a little help from Moore ... much to our demise!

If they are incomplete or knocked down he still has time for another try and one of three things will happen, two of them good or at least neutral for the Ravens .. a neutral outcome in one option at least until they get to the last throw where time runs out if they don't make a TD:

Option 1. Joe completes the Alley Ooop Hail Mary past a hapless Broncos Rahim Moore and a confused Tony Carter who let JAcoby streak past while he considered whether he might try to run with him and Moore was drifting back in the general direction of where Jacoby was heading but apparently was dreaming of his Bahamas vacation about to start rather than making a real effort to get a better angle on the ball and come in from at least behind the WR to either jump and knock the ball down or INT is and if all else fails and the Jones catches it at least be there in position for a guarantee tackle to also end the game.

No way the whole team, including all the fatties on the Oline recover from the shock of actually completing that pass and all get down there and lined up properly to snap the ball for a FG attempt in 18 seconds left which is what would have been left at most after the long route was run, pass caught and tackle made!

But NOOOOO! Moore at the critical point of his life to date was totally out to lunch..... this is why Fox, in all his "play it safe statistical odds' bet against PMFManning trying to deliberately get that first down on the last three plays we had the ball before punting to Ravens, for the win and to end it all right there rather than leave it up to either Jacob Hester or Ronnie Hillman trying to run over Haloti Ngata, Suggs and Ray Lewis on 3 successive DIVE PLAYS to save the day .... I know I would bet on Manning any day over Hillman or Hester for a 7 yard dive play between guard and center into the teeth of the Ravens front 7 when they all know it is coming!

...Or, god forbid rely on the porous weaker members of our secondary when a smart Ravens OC sends Boldin and Smith out to the left side of the field to draw Champ and Harris out of action and then toss the called play to the right deep sideline to speedy Jones with only Carter and Moore anywhere near the play at all!

Its very clear the Ravens knew how to take advantage of our very POOR situational awareness error in trying to follow the simple 'Stats rule' described in the first post of this thread, and forget what kind of game you were in and the fact that Manning is one of the best in the NFL history at grabbing a first down when the team really MUST have it!

Option 2. the Pass is incomplete or we knock it down, that works as a neutral outcome on maybe two Hail Mary attempts max for the Ravens leaving then one last Hail Mary attempt to tie the game.. each incomplete stops the clock.

Option 3. Rahim Moore instead of crapping the season away actually makes the play that Champ later swears he makes 99 times out of a 100 in practice and shares Hero status with Manning and DT for winning the game and keeping us alive for another week at least.

Alas, we all know what happened.

Insight-fully Elway said today that as long as everyone on the team takes this pain and the lessons learned from their mistakes and does NOT GET TOO DEFENSIVE and instead really digest what happened and determine to improve and not make the same mistake again, then this game can really serve as the spring board to bigger and better things.

But if they (See Fox in his interview) just brush off the hard questions and not address them head on and acknowledge and learn from the lost opportunities, then we are more likely going to have to experience them again!!

I really hope Foxy and the players got the not so subtle message from The Duke who finally learned them well after the 1996 Jags game and will take it to heart!?

NUB
01-15-2013, 12:20 AM
A minute is a heckuva a long time in today's NFL...

You play the percentages or you literally try and end the game. Denver's secondary was getting torched all goddam day long against a QB known for his huge arm and long-ball. You just don't run it there -- you pass to try and end the damn game. Denver wasn't even gonna be competing at that point were it not for two return-TDs! You realize that? Baltimore was controlling the game and Denver was lucky just to have a lead of any sort. You can play the "percentages" all you want, but all signs, including the obvious fact Denver lost, should have said go for it. Nobody should have felt safe just because a bunch stats told you so. We all saw the same damn game. The safest option was for Baltimore to never see the field again. Period.

Beantown Bronco
01-15-2013, 04:53 AM
Because that is NOT what happened that's Why!!! Foxy admitted today in the post mort that on that series in question his main objective was indeed to drain clock time and not so much to get a first down!!


Way to bump my post from hours before that revelation. Where were you when it was a legit question posed by half the board?

TonyR
01-15-2013, 06:49 AM
Just rewatched the game. Even Dierdork and the other guy were SHOCKED that Manning handed off on 3rd down. Said the Ravens couldn't have hoped for anything better after giving up a first down already. Called it VERY conservative and proved to be prophetic.


Really? I'll have to go back and watch myself. I thought they questioned the 3rd down hand off to Hester earlier in the game (which I myself, and I think everybody here, question) but thought they agreed with the decision to run the clock in the late 4th quarter which we're talking about here.

WolfpackGuy
01-15-2013, 07:08 AM
No team is going to pass in that situation.

Bleeding the clock was the right call.

The Ratbirds were out of time outs, and you don't expect some fuggin fluke play like that to beat you.

Beantown Bronco
01-15-2013, 07:27 AM
I love the "it didn't work, so it was the wrong call" arguments.

How about all those 3rd and longs where passing the ball didn't get the first down? I guess it was the wrong call to pass and we should've run instead? Is that really the argument?

Sometimes it doesn't matter what you do. But just because something doesn't work, it doesn't mean it was the wrong call. Receivers drop balls, balls get batted, people fall down, people don't do their job. Any number of things can make the perfect play call not work, just as there are instances of plays being run that should have no chance of succeeding sometimes end up working.

MplsBronco
01-15-2013, 08:49 AM
you want to know who else has seen more games than your or my ass? John Fox!

next.

Who was right in this case, genius? Certainly NOT John Fox. Next.

BroncoBeavis
01-15-2013, 09:19 AM
I love the "it didn't work, so it was the wrong call" arguments.

That's kind of a straw man though. Nobody's faulting it because it didn't work. They're faulting it because it wasn't designed to. Ronnie Hillman wasn't going to get 7 yards in the interior of the Ravens D. Even if you absolutely feel compelled to run the ball (and the clock) you could at least make an effort and not completely concede the ball. That whole 3-down set of plays was a concession.

MplsBronco
01-15-2013, 09:31 AM
Really? I'll have to go back and watch myself. I thought they questioned the 3rd down hand off to Hester earlier in the game (which I myself, and I think everybody here, question) but thought they agreed with the decision to run the clock in the late 4th quarter which we're talking about here.

Yep, they were fully expecting playaction, remarking at how Manning is one of the best intermediate passers in the game and how he is suredly going to try and conver here. Then shock that he actually handed off and how it was a dream come true for the Ravens. The best thing they could have hoped for.

I believe you are referring to the fist possession in overtime. We had a 2nd and 1. Ran Hillman up the gut on 2nd down. Ran Hester up the gut on 3rd down. Stymied both times. I don't recall them commenting on the playcalling as much as crediting the Ravens for stuffing them. But yes, that was more horrible, weak-tit playcalling. There could be another Hester run on 3rd down earlier in the game but I had forgotten this exchange on the first drive of OT.

MplsBronco
01-15-2013, 09:32 AM
No team is going to pass in that situation.
Bleeding the clock was the right call.

The Ratbirds were out of time outs, and you don't expect some fuggin fluke play like that to beat you.

BS, plain and simple.

Punisher
01-15-2013, 09:55 AM
What the **** you talking about? Running the ball on 3 and 7 was absolutely the wrong thing to do. It was a bitch call if we make a 8 yard Catch the game is over. We played not to lose, in the playoffs you play to win.

Beantown Bronco
01-15-2013, 10:02 AM
That's kind of a straw man though. Nobody's faulting it because it didn't work. They're faulting it because it wasn't designed to.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

Bronco Yoda
01-15-2013, 10:26 AM
Sometimes it doesn't matter what you do. But just because something doesn't work, it doesn't mean it was the wrong call.

I disagree. IMO It ALWAYS matters what you do. The coach needs to make it clear that every play counts. You play 60 min. not 59 min. & 30 seconds! You fight to the end not just almost the end. You give it your ALL not just 97.2% but 100%. Balls to the wall. Pedal to the metal. All hands on deck. Whatever...

To use a baseball analogy here. You can't hit the ball if you don't swing! If you have a full count and the game is on the line or even runners are stranded with two outs...I tell my kids to swing if it's even close. You don't rely on a subjective Ump call. **** HAPPENS! You certainly don't sit back and wait for more of it. You put the game in your hands not someone elses. And if you fail, so be it. You went out on your own terms and tried your best. YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Beantown Bronco
01-15-2013, 10:30 AM
I disagree. IMO It ALWAYS matters what you do. The coach needs to make it clear that every play counts. You play 60 min. not 59 min. & 30 seconds! You fight to the end not just almost the end. You give it your ALL not just 97.2% but 100%. Balls to the wall. Pedal to the metal. All hands on deck. Whatever...

You're making a different argument. That falls under the kneel down question. NOT the 3rd and 7 run play.

To use a baseball analogy here. You can't hit the ball if you don't swing!

Same here. This is far more fitting in the kneel down discussion. It doesn't apply here, where they actually ran a play and went with the odds. If you're stuck on baseball analogies, maybe bunting with a guy on base and no outs vs swinging away would be a better analogy.

BroncoBeavis
01-15-2013, 10:44 AM
Same here. This is far more fitting in the kneel down discussion. It doesn't apply here, where they actually ran a play and went with the odds. If you're stuck on baseball analogies, maybe bunting with a guy on base and no outs vs swinging away would be a better analogy.

I'd say that call was more like asking Cecil Fielder to bunt with nobody on, using his speed to get on base and seal the game. :)

Beantown Bronco
01-15-2013, 10:47 AM
I'd say that call was more like asking Cecil Fielder to bunt with nobody on, using his speed to get on base and seal the game. :)

If we're being consistent, it would be someone with a 97% chance of moving the runner along....vs swinging away and having a 30-40% chance of getting on base, but a greater than 50% chance of striking out or hitting into a double play.

BroncoBeavis
01-15-2013, 10:54 AM
If we're being consistent, it would be someone with a 97% chance of moving the runner along....vs swinging away and having a 30-40% chance of getting on base, but a greater than 50% chance of striking out or hitting into a double play.

I think you're only looking at run v pass (and even there I can't imagine PM having a less than 50% chance of completing that pass.)

I'm also talking about the kind of run that was called. You could've designed a run (still 97% sure to run the clock) that had a much better chance of netting 7 yards. They should've at least made an attempt to get Hillman outside in space (with 7 ytg). Maybe it's a 10% chance. But it's better than the 0% chance he had up the gut.

Rohirrim
01-15-2013, 10:55 AM
A minute is a heckuva a long time in today's NFL...

You play the percentages or you literally try and end the game. Denver's secondary was getting torched all goddam day long against a QB known for his huge arm and long-ball. You just don't run it there -- you pass to try and end the damn game. Denver wasn't even gonna be competing at that point were it not for two return-TDs! You realize that? Baltimore was controlling the game and Denver was lucky just to have a lead of any sort. You can play the "percentages" all you want, but all signs, including the obvious fact Denver lost, should have said go for it. Nobody should have felt safe just because a bunch stats told you so. We all saw the same damn game. The safest option was for Baltimore to never see the field again. Period.

You also have to take into account where the Broncos were. Their top two RBs are out. Hillman is going down on the first touch and is not much of a pass blocker. The Ravens don't care about play action and are rushing their asses off, if not going for some kind of blitz package on nearly every play. They've shut down DT. Ravens have excellent LBs so anything short is not a gimme, and could be a disaster. It's minus zero degrees on the field and your HOF QB is not playing up to his normal level of performance. The Broncos converted 7 out of 16 third downs on the day. Plus, the coaches by now know that, for whatever reason, the team is not playing up to the level they were when they won eleven games in a row. Throw in that the refs have been ****ing you since the first kickoff. So, the cards you've been dealt all day suck, and yet you think you should go ahead and bet on the possibility of a hole card bailing you out?

Beantown Bronco
01-15-2013, 11:00 AM
I think you're only looking at run v pass (and even there I can't imagine PM having a less than 50% chance of completing that pass.)

He was less than 50% on passes that went over 7 yards in the game.

I'm also talking about the kind of run that was called. You could've designed a run (still 97% sure to run the clock) that had a much better chance of netting 7 yards. They should've at least made an attempt to get Hillman outside in space (with 7 ytg). Maybe it's a 10% chance. But it's better than the 0% chance he had up the gut.

Agreed. The constant runs up the middle sucked and they should've gotten at least a LITTLE creative. You'll get no argument from me on that one.

CEH
01-15-2013, 11:20 AM
Here is a different take maybe

With what Fox did he took the percentage of 93% and gave his defense the onus to win the game. He would not have left the offense any time to really do anything

Now with scenerio #2 you take a shot to win the game with the guy you brought in to do just that. If you fail you still have about a 90% chance to win the game and if they score you leave time for PFM to go down and kick a FG

Now we are just quibbling because as it turned out Denver had a 99% chance to win the game with Fox's scenrio

Beantown Bronco
01-15-2013, 11:24 AM
Here is a different take maybe

With what Fox did he took the percentage of 93% and gave his defense the onus to win the game. He would not have left the offense any time to really do anything

The Falcons and Ravens disagree.

go_broncos
01-15-2013, 11:37 AM
We should have atleast passed in one of the downs and try to get a first down especially with the way our defense is playing.

Bronco Yoda
01-15-2013, 11:49 AM
He (Elway) also backs him privately.

Because you know this right?.... oh wait, no you don't. :giggle:

Your entire argument is unconvincing.

RaiderH8r
01-15-2013, 02:53 PM
If Fox can't find it in him to put the game and the ball in Peyton's hands to deliver the kill shot to end the game in the playoffs then WTF is he doing as HC here anyway? Was Manning brought in to manage games or to win them? If he's here to win games then give him the ****ing ball.

anon
01-16-2013, 01:54 AM
This thread would not even exist if Manning had thrown a pick-six to end regulation. We would all be screaming at Fox for being an idiot when the game was more or less sealed.

For the record, I didn't really like three straight run plays but I wasn't that worried at the time. Our defense wasn't playing well, but I didn't think they could mess up that badly.

If Fox can't find it in him to put the game and the ball in Peyton's hands to deliver the kill shot to end the game in the playoffs then WTF is he doing as HC here anyway? Was Manning brought in to manage games or to win them? If he's here to win games then give him the ****ing ball.

ol#7
01-16-2013, 02:13 AM
Why the bunch formation though? At least spread the field and make the Defense line up in a nickel package. If they don't match up and instead stack the box, it's an easy throw, if they do match up, then you can run a draw much easier.

Everyone who buy's the line that Manning audibled into a run...he didn't have the personnel grouping on the field to do anyting but hand off.

The down to throw was on second down though. The Ravens had just spent there last timeout and there was 2:17 left with the 2 min warning coming. Play action would have worked so well in that situation. 1 first down, just 1 first down...:oyvey:

Beantown Bronco
01-16-2013, 07:45 AM
Everyone who buy's the line that Manning audibled into a run...he didn't have the personnel grouping on the field to do anyting but hand off.


Fox already said it was his call to run and there wasn't an audible, so that's not an issue; but to say he couldn't do anything but hand off out of a bunch formation with the grouping he had is just plain wrong. As long as there is at least one eligible receiver on the field, and there were at least three, you can throw the ball.

maven
01-16-2013, 08:15 AM
3rd and 7 and you run the ball... i cant believe some of you are defending that play. its foxball pussy ****. you play to win the ****ing game. at worst you can roll out manning and take a shot and if its not there he slides. pussy ball doesnt win super bowls.

TonyR
01-16-2013, 09:29 AM
This thread would not even exist if Manning had thrown a pick-six to end regulation.

Yup, and it also wouldn't exist if Moore and Carter make a routine play on a long, desperation heave to Jacoby Jones.

go_broncos
01-16-2013, 10:17 AM
Fox is a scared coach.
There are so many chances we got to take a 10/14 point lead.
What did he do?..he kept on running the ball.
Forget about 3rd and 7..when there a turnover by Baltimore,we didn't even attempt to score.
Also.at the end of half and regulation..didn't even try for a FG.
****ing idiot

broncocalijohn
01-16-2013, 11:11 AM
Here is a different take maybe

With what Fox did he took the percentage of 93% and gave his defense the onus to win the game. He would not have left the offense any time to really do anything

Now with scenerio #2 you take a shot to win the game with the guy you brought in to do just that. If you fail you still have about a 90% chance to win the game and if they score you leave time for PFM to go down and kick a FG

Now we are just quibbling because as it turned out Denver had a 99% chance to win the game with Fox's scenrio

Actually, it was a 13% chance to score a TD at that time with field position and time on the clock. If we ran a pass play and it was incomplete, the Ravens chances of a touchdown was doubled to 26%.

Cito Pelon
01-16-2013, 11:38 AM
He was less than 50% on passes that went over 7 yards in the game.



Agreed. The constant runs up the middle sucked and they should've gotten at least a LITTLE creative. You'll get no argument from me on that one.

No kidding. We saw in the reg season how several times that same strategy nearly backfired as teams were coming back on them and had a last gasp chance to tie. Mixing in some passes is an acceptable plan, but not according to Fox. I wonder if it was even DISCUSSED as a possibility.

Also, I wonder if the coaching staff was getting the players prepared for a possible tie. I've been on plenty of sidelines and somebody was always saying "Don't relax now, it's not over yet, be ready to go back out there, etc". And the O staff should have been prepared for situational plays, and they should have been coaching up the players for unexpected situations. Instead they were "shell-shocked".

Of course, they probably did all that, but sometimes players don't listen, fall into complacency no matter what coaches and team captains are telling them. Sometimes you just don't have the it factor or the want to, and the other team does. It's happened many, many a time, and in the end that's probably what happened to Denver.

And factor in that four of the teams best players (Manning, Champ, Von, Elvis) weren't exactly showing up bigtime. This affects other guys because your top players aren't leading by example, and so if they walk up to another player and say "You have to step up your game", or something like that, what does the other guy automatically think - "YOU step up YOUR game, then come talk to me".

broncocalijohn
01-16-2013, 11:40 AM
3rd and 7 and you run the ball... i cant believe some of you are defending that play. its foxball p***Y ****. you play to win the ****ing game. at worst you can roll out manning and take a shot and if its not there he slides. p***Y ball doesnt win super bowls.

He could have thrown on 2nd down when Ravens thought we would be running out the clock. THat is more believable. We had them where we wanted. The run wasn't a bad idea but not even trying to get the first down was retarded. It was like he wanted to run up the middle to set the ball in the middle of the field for a field goal attempt? Nope. A ****ing punt. Let Hilman get to the outside with open space. Fake handoff to Hester and pitch outside (or handoff for safety).

With Fox taking a knee to go into overtime (and not be guaranteed to regroup the offense because of a coin flip), he was playing scared like Marty ball did against us during the first drive. If Fox doesn't want to be pegged as Marty Ball, he better fix this way of thinking.

mwill07
01-17-2013, 02:48 PM
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but I was reviewing the play-by-play of last years Baltimore @ NE game. Here is how the game ended:

2:46 1 - 10 NWE 33 Tom Brady pass complete short left to Deion Branch for 7 yards (tackle by Bernard Pollard)
2:04 2 - 3 NWE 40 BenJarvus Green-Ellis left tackle for -1 yards (tackle by Terrell Suggs and Cary Williams)
1:56 3 - 4 NWE 39 Tom Brady pass incomplete short right intended for Aaron Hernandez (defended by Ed Reed)
1:53 4 - 4 NWE 39 Zoltan Mesko punts 44 yards, returned by Lardarius Webb for 4 yards (tackle by Sergio Brown)
1:44 1 - 10 RAV 21 Joe Flacco pass incomplete deep left intended for Anquan Boldin
1:39 2 - 10 RAV 21 Joe Flacco pass complete short left to Dennis Pitta for 5 yards (tackle by Patrick Chung)
1:14 3 - 5 RAV 26 Joe Flacco pass complete short left to Anquan Boldin for 13 yards
1:09 1 - 10 RAV 39 Joe Flacco pass incomplete short middle intended for Ray Rice (defended by Jerod Mayo)
1:05 2 - 10 RAV 39 Joe Flacco pass complete short middle to Anquan Boldin for 9 yards (tackle by Nate Jones)
0:58 3 - 1 RAV 48 Joe Flacco pass complete short left to Anquan Boldin for 29 yards (tackle by Devin McCourty)
0:51 1 - 10 NWE 23 Joe Flacco pass complete short right to Anquan Boldin for 9 yards (tackle by Julian Edelman). Anquan Boldin fumbles (forced by Julian Edelman), ball out of bounds at NWE-10
0:27 2 - 1 NWE 14 Joe Flacco pass incomplete short right intended for Lee Evans (defended by Sterling Moore)
0:22 3 - 1 NWE 14 Joe Flacco pass incomplete short right intended for Dennis Pitta (defended by Sterling Moore)
0:15 4 - 1 NWE 14 Billy Cundiff 32 yard field goal no good

So, New England had a 3rd & 4 situation inside 2 minutes, up by 3, at their own 39. They chose to throw the ball. The pass was incomplete. When the Ravens got the ball, they had 1:44 on the clock, from their own 21.

They ran 6 plays to get to the 23 yard line which took 53 seconds. That left them with three shots at the end-zone, plus time for a FG attempt.

Had Belichick ran the ball on 3rd & 4 (a much more makable down and distance), that would have taken off about another 40 seconds, Baltimore would have gotten the ball at the 20 with about a minute left. Had their ensuing drive gone identically, they would have maybe had time for one shot at the end-zone (or kick the FG) ... maybe.

Had Cundiff made a simple 32 yard FG, it would have been appropriate to blame Belichick for not burning more time prior to the 2 minute warning.

No, I think running the ball in this situation was the right thing to do.

NUB
01-17-2013, 09:50 PM
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but I was reviewing the play-by-play of last years Baltimore @ NE game. Here is how the game ended:

2:46 1 - 10 NWE 33 Tom Brady pass complete short left to Deion Branch for 7 yards (tackle by Bernard Pollard)
2:04 2 - 3 NWE 40 BenJarvus Green-Ellis left tackle for -1 yards (tackle by Terrell Suggs and Cary Williams)
1:56 3 - 4 NWE 39 Tom Brady pass incomplete short right intended for Aaron Hernandez (defended by Ed Reed)
1:53 4 - 4 NWE 39 Zoltan Mesko punts 44 yards, returned by Lardarius Webb for 4 yards (tackle by Sergio Brown)
1:44 1 - 10 RAV 21 Joe Flacco pass incomplete deep left intended for Anquan Boldin
1:39 2 - 10 RAV 21 Joe Flacco pass complete short left to Dennis Pitta for 5 yards (tackle by Patrick Chung)
1:14 3 - 5 RAV 26 Joe Flacco pass complete short left to Anquan Boldin for 13 yards
1:09 1 - 10 RAV 39 Joe Flacco pass incomplete short middle intended for Ray Rice (defended by Jerod Mayo)
1:05 2 - 10 RAV 39 Joe Flacco pass complete short middle to Anquan Boldin for 9 yards (tackle by Nate Jones)
0:58 3 - 1 RAV 48 Joe Flacco pass complete short left to Anquan Boldin for 29 yards (tackle by Devin McCourty)
0:51 1 - 10 NWE 23 Joe Flacco pass complete short right to Anquan Boldin for 9 yards (tackle by Julian Edelman). Anquan Boldin fumbles (forced by Julian Edelman), ball out of bounds at NWE-10
0:27 2 - 1 NWE 14 Joe Flacco pass incomplete short right intended for Lee Evans (defended by Sterling Moore)
0:22 3 - 1 NWE 14 Joe Flacco pass incomplete short right intended for Dennis Pitta (defended by Sterling Moore)
0:15 4 - 1 NWE 14 Billy Cundiff 32 yard field goal no good

So, New England had a 3rd & 4 situation inside 2 minutes, up by 3, at their own 39. They chose to throw the ball. The pass was incomplete. When the Ravens got the ball, they had 1:44 on the clock, from their own 21.

They ran 6 plays to get to the 23 yard line which took 53 seconds. That left them with three shots at the end-zone, plus time for a FG attempt.

Had Belichick ran the ball on 3rd & 4 (a much more makable down and distance), that would have taken off about another 40 seconds, Baltimore would have gotten the ball at the 20 with about a minute left. Had their ensuing drive gone identically, they would have maybe had time for one shot at the end-zone (or kick the FG) ... maybe.

Had Cundiff made a simple 32 yard FG, it would have been appropriate to blame Belichick for not burning more time prior to the 2 minute warning.

No, I think running the ball in this situation was the right thing to do.

Uh, in both "scenarios" Baltimore pushes down the field and attempts a game-winning field goal.

Looks to me like going for the kill on 3rd down was the right move in either situation.

R8R H8R
01-17-2013, 10:14 PM
Because you know this right?.... oh wait, no you don't. :giggle:

Your entire argument is unconvincing.

You ruined my day knowing I didn't convince you, despite the fact I wasn't talking you.

mwill07
01-17-2013, 10:39 PM
Uh, in both "scenarios" Baltimore pushes down the field and attempts a game-winning field goal.

Looks to me like going for the kill on 3rd down was the right move in either situation.

now, imagine Baltimore was down by 7.