Thank You, Mike McCarthy

[morpheusmeyers]

The Packers were controlling the game up to that point and didn't need to chance giving us some life.

I thought they should have taken the easy 3, too, and gone up 10-0.

[Oldfan]

Yeah, but think about what you're saying. Remember a few years back when Norv came back to DC with the Chargers. He's down 7, scores a TD in the last seconds of the game and is down 1. Then he goes for 2 and gets it and wins the game. That was a gutsy call (I honestly didn't think Norv had it in him). Its something that people can point to and say "this play cost them the game" or "this play won them the game". Thats what McCarthy was going for. He wanted to put us away, to shatter our confidence, to say "we're better than you and don't you forget it". Unfortunately, they're not that much better than us (if at all). I've got no problem with a coach going for the kill. In fact, one of the problems I had with Gibbs II is that he almost NEVER went for the kill, always playing conservative. Zorn was a bit different (I won't say better) in that he rarely played the odds except when he seemed to be told to do so by his bosses.

But when you don't play the odds and you make it, people call you gutsy and love it. When you don't play the odds and you miss it, people call you stupid. But when you play the odds, people call you afraid.

Right now McCarthy is being called stupid because he wanted to be called gutsy.

As I've established in previous threads, I turn a deaf ear to speculations about the psychological factors in a football game. For me, the right call is the one which offers the highest probability of winning the game by one point or more -- and the results don't matter.

In my judgment, Jim Zorn always made the right calls in fourth down situations, but they rarely worked because of poor execution. They were still the right calls.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I agree that GB's failure there was a key to the game. 14-0 at that point probably buries us. However, I can see why McCarthy rolled the dice. It's tempting for sure. It took a pretty good, disciplined play to prevent a TD.

I usually look at things this way...as a Redskin fan, I was praying they'd kick the FG. That tells me that momentum, etc. was in their favor and makes me understand why they thought they could score 7 there (since I agreed).

Again, in hindsight, your premise isn't wrong since they scored 0 points on that drive and ultimately it contributed to them losing an OT game. But, had they scored a TD there, I think they cruise to a W.

[Oldfan]

Again, in hindsight, your premise isn't wrong since they scored 0 points on that drive and ultimately it contributed to them losing an OT game. But, had they scored a TD there, I think they cruise to a W.

Hindsight should have nothing to do with it. I think taking the three gave the Pack a higher probability of winning the game by one point or more. If I'm wrong about that, then I'm wrong regardless of the outcome.

[skinfan2k]

He gave up a 99% chance to put up three more points.

they scored the fg on the next drive anyways. There were up 10-0 regardless

[Thinking Skins]

As I've established in previous threads, I turn a deaf ear to speculations about the psychological factors in a football game. For me, the right call is the one which offers the highest probability of winning the game by one point or more -- and the results don't matter.

In my judgment, Jim Zorn always made the right calls in fourth down situations, but they rarely worked because of poor execution. They were still the right calls.

Yeah, but thats using YOUR logic. There are a lot of factors inside a game other than just probabilities. I'm not trying to convince you to think my way, but I'm saying things that I considered when I asked the same question, one of which leads to the same conclusion as McCarthy, so its a feasible line of reasoning into what he was thinking. You can dismiss it, but it doesn't mean its not a relevant line of reasoning.

And as your Zorn comment suggests, there are other things to consider than just logic. Maybe "can my team pull this off", "what position does this put us in if we don't pull this off", and "how does giving them a 4th down stop (effectively a turnover) affect the momentum of the game" are important things to consider.

[Oldfan]

they scored the fg on the next drive anyways. There were up 10-0 regardless

How did you determine that the subsequent field goal would not have happened anyway to make the score 13-0?

[Thinking Skins]

they scored the fg on the next drive anyways. There were up 10-0 regardless

In my view this is kinda unimportant to the question at hand because even though they went up 10-0 on the next drive, we now had a mentality on defense that "we just punched the big bully in the mouth! We can stop them". I mean even the FG they got was a big move because we stopped them AGAIN from scoring when they were deep in our territory. These were key to our staying in the game.

[skinfan2k]

How did you determine that the subsequent field goal would not have happened anyway to make the score 13-0?

Well because they wouldn't have gotten the ball with a good field position and we would not have started at the 1. Well regardless we both dont know how the situations would have changed. We can only analyze what happened

[Oldfan]

Yeah, but thats using YOUR logic. There are a lot of factors inside a game other than just probabilities. I'm not trying to convince you to think my way, but I'm saying things that I considered when I asked the same question, one of which leads to the same conclusion as McCarthy, so its a feasible line of reasoning into what he was thinking. You can dismiss it, but it doesn't mean its not a relevant line of reasoning.

I'm not saying McCathy didn't have a reason. I offered my opinion that his reasons weren't sound because they didn't give his team the best chance of winning the game by at least one point.

And as your Zorn comment suggests, there are other things to consider than just logic. Maybe "can my team pull this off", "what position does this put us in if we don't pull this off", and "how does giving them a 4th down stop (effectively a turnover) affect the momentum of the game" are important things to consider.

"Momentum" is a factor that didn't exist in Football before Howard Cosell made it up on Monday Night Football in 1970. I think it's hokum.

[zoony]

I think McCarthy knew that his lack of a running game would make it impossible to sit on a lead... and in order to put the Redskins away, he was going to need Touchdowns, not field goals. Not to mention the injuries to his secondary... he knew that McNabb and the passing game would get going at some point (just like Detroit, etc.) and that when it did, he was going to need more than a 10 point cushion.

If this were the Ravens or Steelers, I think the right call is the field goal. If this is Andy Reid or Mike M, the right call is going for the TD.

There are no hard and fast rules that you can spread over all teams.

[skinfan2k]

"Momentum" is a factor that didn't exist in Football before Howard Cosell made it up on Monday Night Football in 1970. I think it's hokum.

If you have played sports, you know there is a factor that you cant account for. Hell even in my kickball league, i can tell where the momentum shifts from one team to another

[2cents]

I'm not sure about the posts about Green Bay "abusing" us in the running game. Take away that 75 yard run and they got very little. Now they didn't really try much, but I don't think we were abused. From what I saw, Rocky missed the coverage and that was it. Other than that I thought we were decent against the run.

[zoony]

I'm not sure about the posts about Green Bay "abusing" us in the running game. Take away that 75 yard run and they got very little. Now they didn't really try much, but I don't think we were abused. From what I saw, Rocky missed the coverage and that was it. Other than that I thought we were decent against the run.

Absolutely.

And even more important is the WAY they got those running yards. GB's run works off of the threat of a pass- gaining 7-8 yards up the middle on a draw play, often out of the shotgun, against a nickel or dime defense.

Green Bay doesn't have the capability to line up in the I and pound the rock when 8+ guys are in the box to run out the clock. McCarthy knows this, and this is exactly why he felt like he need touchdowns, not field goals, early on. Green Bay is unable to sit on a lead.

[Oldfan]

Well because they wouldn't have gotten the ball with a good field position and we would not have started at the 1. Well regardless we both dont know how the situations would have changed. We can only analyze what happened

Smith's punt was fielded at the GB 15. That's not good field position.

While you're right that I can't assume that next possession would have scored three anyway, you can't assume that the three was only because the Skins were pinned deep.

[Oldfan]

If you have played sports, you know there is a factor that you cant account for. Hell even in my kickball league, i can tell where the momentum shifts from one team to another

I played sports all my life. I've seen teams go on streaks, but I've never called it momentum. But, it's not what it's called that's important here.

The inference made here is that it's a predictable factor which a play caller should take into account. That's just nonsense.

[redskins55]

All this talk about GB running the ball is absurd. They have Aaron Rogers in the backfield.. Why in the Green and gold hell would they run the ball and take the ball out of the hands of their best player and put it in the hands of a guy who they see every day in practice a know he cant get the job done?? Its like asking Peyton Manning to hand off the ball the entire second half because their up 13-3 . Its not gonna happen! C'mon some of you get real!

[zCommander]

they scored the fg on the next drive anyways. There were up 10-0 regardless

Was that a guarantee? You take the points you know you can get and not what you can get.

I also agree with OF as I thought of the same thing and said the same in the chat room and how going for it is going to come back and haunt them. And it did.

[Skinsinparadise]

I see nothing wrong with McCarthy going for it in that situation. general rules don't exist. Coaches decisions are made in accordance with situational percentages and momentum streaks. When playing in a hostile setting (away-game) and you have the ability to take the kill-shot...you take it. He took the kill shot and missed his mark. As you can tell by the outcome of the game, the Redskins were always within striking distance. If they go up by three scores at that point, it all but closes the Redskins chances of a comeback.

Momentum though cuts both ways -- when your team isn't doing much and all of a sudden you stop a team on a goal line stand you can argue it gives a lift to a team desperate in need for one, along with firing up a quiet crowd. I agree with Oldfan on the %s. I also don't agree with the counter arguments here that you make the move from an emotional/momentum stand point -- decisions aren't made in a vacuum, its not just about what if it works but also IMO you have to factor what if it doesn't work -- and weigh the two variables against each other. Would the crowd be excited about being down 10-0? i doubt it. But stopping your opponent on the goal line -- talk about changing the mood and the flow of the game. Shanny himself in his postgame interview said it was the play of the game.

[SWFLSkins]

I will thank McCarthy for his traditional use of "icing the kicker" in OT. He did call timeout to give Gano time to think but didn't wait until the snap to do it.

Not only was OldFan right but this is a great point as well. And at least I think Gano was ready for the ice this time.

[SWFLSkins]

If you have played sports, you know there is a factor that you cant account for. Hell even in my kickball league, i can tell where the momentum shifts from one team to another

All you really need is a couple of good plays in a row, and the momo is coming your way. The more the other team believes it the more perception becomes reality.

[SWFLSkins]

I played sports all my life. I've seen teams go on streaks, but I've never called it momentum. But, it's not what it's called that's important here.

The inference made here is that it's a predictable factor which a play caller should take into account. That's just nonsense.

You mean a coach should not base decisions on his "feel" of the game and the factors involved? I usually agree with you on most points but your losing me on this point. He could have kicked the FG and kept the momentum, by not getting the TD he not only handed over the ball, he handed over the momentum which is entirely more important strategically. I guess you don't value emotion as much as I do in sports, but it has worked for me both as a player and as a coach.

[BayouBrave86]

Our redzone defense was the best in the league last year, and they seem to be picking up where they left off last year regardless of the scheme change. Now about those drives letting teams getting into field goal position late..

[1972FAN]

McCarthy was showing no fear or respect to the Redskins D. So I'm glad the Redskins sent a message.

[Rodriggo]

Here's the situation: With 42 minutes remaining in the game, Mike McCarthy's offense had a fourth and goal-to-go at the one. He decided to go for it rather than take a gimme field goal. When he did that, I turned to my wife and said,"He's giving us a chance to win this game."

Absolutely. You're dominating, on the road, why wouldn't you go up two scores and put the pressure back on the home team? Kick a FG and there is no chance for a momentum swing.