Gibbs on the radio...

[Xameil]

Unbelievable...of course he made the right decision. Wasn't there a play that only needed to go inches earlier in the game, and Portis just barely got it? With our O-line a 46 (not 49) yard field goal is more a gimme with a kicker who was on fire all day then handing the ball off to Portis.

Besides, we won the game...obviously it was the right call

[Larry Gude]

BTW the field goal was 46 from the left hash mark

Sorry. I thought coach said 49 on the radio.

[herrmag]

I find this thread full of irony. Had Gibbs gone for it and not made it, he'd be lambasted by this board. Because he kicked the field goal and won the game, some are still lambasting him for it. Wow, win-win situation for the coach, eh?

[Henry]

Gibbs is 2-0 in overtime this year. At what point can we stop second-guessing his overtime decisions?

[dockeryfan]

I enjoyed the interview as well. He tried to describe his decision making process as a coach, and he did it in a way that was easy to listen to.

[bubba9497]

Geez

use a little common sense here

what are the risks and rewards

FG Attempt, takes only one play, CAN END THE GAME WITH A WIN, if missed or other error, gives the other team the ball back

FG 100% all day, in his range, one of the best snappers in the game

Going for it on 4th down, can risk fumble, penalty, not making it just like the FG Attempt, BUT even if your do make it still DOES NOT WIN the game, and you increase your risk of problems occurring for each play you have after making the first down until or IF you can score after making the first down... again not a given

So logically going for the FG is a lot less risky, and has a greater payoff than going for a first down at that point in the game

I mean the whole point of Sudden Death OT, is scoring first to end the game with a win, a safety, a FG, a TD it doesn't matter how you score

[swisha]

Going for the FG on that 4th down was the right decision, but I don't like Gibbs' logic for the decision. All the things he mentioned that could go wrong if we went for it could HAPPEN on the field goal attempt. If Gibbs thought that those mistakes for prone to happen, then FIX it, don't just avoid it so it wouldn't happen.

It was the right decision because our FG kicker was making it all game, and, frankly, the chance of making that FG at that time was just as good as making it on the 4th down.

[bubba9497]

Gibbs is 2-0 in overtime this year. At what point can we stop second-guessing his overtime decisions?

we could be having a year like the Pats, and every wanna be coach, or Madden player would still be second guessing stuff :doh:

[Larry Gude]

Some of you wishing for us to go for it on 4th down in overtime, did you forget about the Giants game? The right side of our line is as stout as a croissant. So what happens when the runner is stuffed for no gain because the left side is overloaded, and the Jets march down the field for the winning FG? What's your answer then? Gibbs is an idiot for not trusting his kicker, who was on fire all day, had already made 4 FG's. We should have done x y z blah blah.

Gibbs made the right call. We won the game. I swear, some of you people are never happy. You act like we're 3-5.

There is a constant battle in this forum between people who do not want to question ANYTHING and get upset when anyone wants to just talk about a given decision.

I painted the radio interview in the best possible light using all sorts of positive and complimentary words to make it as nice and fuzzy and warm as possible. I emphasised that it was great for the coach to share so much.

And still, the faithful are just put off by anything that even looks like a doubt or a question or a discouraging word.

Fascinating.

[bubba9497]

Going for the FG on that 4th down was the right decision, but I don't like Gibbs' logic for the decision. All the things he mentioned that could go wrong if we went for it could HAPPEN on the field goal attempt. If Gibbs thought that those mistakes for prone to happen, then FIX it, don't just avoid it so it wouldn't happen.

It was the right decision because our FG kicker was making it all game, and, frankly, the chance of making that FG at that time was just as good as making it on the 4th down.

But Making a FG ENDS the game, making a first doesn't, and increases your chance of something wrong happening, simply because you still have to have more plays to score

risk vs reward

[Larry Gude]

Going for the FG on that 4th down was the right decision, but I don't like Gibbs' logic for the decision. All the things he mentioned that could go wrong if we went for it could HAPPEN on the field goal attempt. If Gibbs thought that those mistakes for prone to happen, then FIX it, don't just avoid it so it wouldn't happen.

It was the right decision because our FG kicker was making it all game, and, frankly, the chance of making that FG at that time was just as good as making it on the 4th down.

...don't say that too loud. You'll be labeled a heritic. :laugh:

[Henry]

There is a constant battle in this forum between people who do not want to question ANYTHING and get upset when anyone wants to just talk about a given decision.

Fascinating. People disagree with your one opinion and you take that to mean people do not want to question ANYTHING.

I painted the radio interview in the best possible light using all sorts of positive and complimentary words to make it as nice and fuzzy and warm as possible. I emphasised that it was great for the coach to share so much.

You used two nice fuzzy words. In this sentence: yesterday on the radio was a fantastic segment into the mind of coach Gibbs. and I thoroughly enjoyed him talking about it.

And in that context, those words are not complimentary of anything but the radio show.

And still, the faithful are just put off by anything that even looks like a doubt or a question or a discouraging word.

I think you are confusing the word 'anything' with the word 'everything.'

Fascinating.

Is that supposed to be a compliment?

[swisha]

Going for it on 4th down, can risk fumble, penalty, not making it just like the FG Attempt, BUT even if your do make it still DOES NOT WIN the game, and you increase your risk of problems occurring for each play you have after making the first down until or IF you can score after making the first down... again not a given

This is a moronic logic. Why don't we just kick the freaking FG every time we get into his range then instead of going for the TD, because there is always the chance of the TO or getting a penalty.

This is a reason why teams like the Colts or Pats would NEVER, EVER think about the chance of a penalty or turnover during their decision-making process; it is because they know the chance of those things happening are very rare because as a team, they are very disclipine. If Gibbs just reduce that chances of those mistakes having, then he wouldn't have to coach scared all the time.

[Bang]

You obviously go for the field goal, no matter who you are or what they've done during the game.

It's an opportunity to win instantly, and you're within the kicker's range. If you don't have confidence that he can make the kick, he doesn't belong on the team. It doesn't show a lack of confidence in the offense, it shows the kill instinct that people are lamenting we don't have. You take the shot.

You might miss, but if you do the game is not over. If you don't miss, and the odds favor this, the game IS over, and you win.

This is a moronic logic. Why don't we just kick the freaking FG every time we get into his range then instead of going for the TD

Sorry, but this logic is completely moronic. It's simple. Because in OVERTIME the kick WINS THE GAME.

~Bang

[bubba9497]

There is a constant battle in this forum between people who do not want to question ANYTHING and get upset when anyone wants to just talk about a given decision.

I painted the radio interview in the best possible light using all sorts of positive and complimentary words to make it as nice and fuzzy and warm as possible. I emphasised that it was great for the coach to share so much.

And still, the faithful are just put off by anything that even looks like a doubt or a question or a discouraging word.

Fascinating.

no, that is not entirely true

It is not that there are questions asked, but some of the actual questions that are being asked... most are not anything worth questioning, if you use common sense and logic.

and usually most who ask those type questions don't really want an answer, that just want someone else to agree with them, right or wrong

If somkeone disagrees, it's not because they are tright, it's because they "don't want anyone questioning Coach Gibbs"

[youngestson]

I get your point but.....most teams will go for the fieldgoal in that situation. Other than maybe three teams, who is going to asume that they will pick up 2-3 yards on a 4th down?

The chances of things going wrong on a fieldgoal, while present, are simply less then on a running play. And the last possession of regulation saw the Skins failing to pick up 2 yards on a 3rd down deep on their end of the field.

There are plenty of choices made in play calling this year which I will join you in labeling as too conservative, but this is not one.

[skinfan2k]

This is a moronic logic. Why don't we just kick the freaking FG every time we get into his range then instead of going for the TD, because there is always the chance of the TO or getting a penalty.

This is a reason why teams like the Colts or Pats would NEVER, EVER think about the chance of a penalty or turnover during their decision-making process; it is because they know the chance of those things happening are very rare because as a team, they are very disclipine. If Gibbs just reduce that chances of those mistakes having, then he wouldn't have to coach scared all the time.

you dont have a clue on what you wrote do you? Its OT and teams that get the first chance to score usually win the game. Gibbs got the first chance to win and he took. Plain and simple Thats not how it is in regulation..

[bubba9497]

This is a moronic logic. Why don't we just kick the freaking FG every time we get into his range then instead of going for the TD, because there is always the chance of the TO or getting a penalty.

This is a reason why teams like the Colts or Pats would NEVER, EVER think about the chance of a penalty or turnover during their decision-making process; it is because they know the chance of those things happening are very rare because as a team, they are very disclipine. If Gibbs just reduce that chances of those mistakes having, then he wouldn't have to coach scared all the time.

in OT, what difference does it make TD or FG???

talk about Moronic logic

[Larry Gude]

I enjoyed the interview as well. He tried to describe his decision making process as a coach, and he did it in a way that was easy to listen to.

You mean to say you didn't find yourself getting upset that some 'fan' had the termerity to even ask such a question?

:laugh:

[swisha]

But Making a FG ENDS the game, making a first doesn't, and increases your chance of something wrong happening, simply because you still have to have more plays to score

risk vs reward

In general, the chance of making that 46 yard FG should be much less than the chance of getting a TO or getting a penalty in what, 5 to 6 more running plays if we did make that first day?. It's amazing that Gibbs think the Offense is incapable of running 5-6 running plays without getting a penalty or TO.

Again, I'd like to say that I was fine with that decision solely since our kicker was on fire that game.

[swisha]

in OT, what difference does it make TD or FG???

talk about Moronic logic

Maybe you should read it again????:doh:

[bubba9497]

In general, the chance of making that 46 yard FG should be much less than the chance of getting a TO or getting a penalty in what, 5 to 6 more running plays if we did make that first day?. It's amazing that Gibbs think the Offense is incapable of running 5-6 running plays without getting a penalty or TO.

Again, I'd like to say that I was fine with that decision solely since our kicker was on fire that game.

you probably have the same amount of chance to have a mishap on each play, FG or going for it

tell me, which is risker

1 Play

or maybe 5 or 6 plays?

and it has NOTHING to do with showing confidence BS at that point in the game... the point of playing the game is to WIN it

nothing builds confidence like wins

[swisha]

you dont have a clue on what you wrote do you? Its OT and teams that get the first chance to score usually win the game. Gibbs got the first chance to win and he took. Plain and simple Thats not how it is in regulation..

Dude, I was talking about if we were scared to make mistakes when get close to the End zone, then we should just kick the FG EVERY time we get in range to avoid those situations, not just in OT, but in regulations to go along with Gibbs' logic since Gibbs think the chance of the offense making mistakes is much greater than our FG kicker making a FG.

[bubba9497]

Maybe you should read it again????:doh:

maybe you should

your "logic" is flawed

your are talking about two different scenarios

much different decision going for 4th down vs a FG in Regulation than in OT, and you apply the same thinking

and Gibbs has gone for it on 4th down several times in Regulation with some success and some failure.... so I don't understand what you are questioning

[Bang]

It's amazing that Gibbs think the Offense is incapable of running 5-6 running plays without getting a penalty or TO.

See, if there was just us on the field, fine. But people tend to forget that the other team is also out there, and they MIGHT just make a play. They are allowed to try to stop us, and quite a few of them have been able to do it, especially when the field gets shorter.

I don't think it's playing scared. I think it's crushing the life out of the opponent when your boot is on his neck.

You ever watch a James Bond movie? The bad guy catches Bond, ties him up and then proceeds to tell him his elaborate plan of how he's going to run it five or six more times to try to get a touchdown.

Meanwhile, Bond is using his handy dandy toys to free himself and blow up the whole place.

Now, when the bad guy catches him, wouldn't it save a lot of trouble to just shoot him in the head before he regains consciousness?

of course it would.

But the bad guys never learn, do they?

~Bang