Warhead36 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Maybe he wants to get Andrew Luck... lol That's his plan. Harbaugh isn't an idiot, in fact he's a genius. Winning last week set him back in the Luck sweepstakes, 2-0 would almost guarantee no shot at Luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirClintonPortis Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 That's right up there with Jim Zorn letting the Lions stay on the field because he didn't want them to kick a field goal. ---------- Post added September-19th-2011 at 01:54 AM ---------- Nothing guaranteed in this game. Take the points and go up 2 scores. That is absolutely the right call. Yeah, tell that to Kyle Shanahan and Rex Grossman. Oh wait, WE WON THE GAME. Harbuagh needs some balls. ---------- Post added September-19th-2011 at 01:56 AM ---------- im not so sure about it being stupid, i mean Alex smith was getting sacked like every other play, so they could of lost yards or thrown an INT or fumbled. All of which happened in the game, he took a two score lead over the risk of turning the ball over or losing field position. Oh ****, why not a QB sneak or a few I-Formation handoffs to Gore? Or hell, ****ing victory formation kneeldowns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ænima Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Wow at the people defending the call. You realize that, for all intents and purposes, what he did was equivalent to kicking a field goal on first down. It was seriously the most gutless call I have ever seen a head coach make. Even Gibbs would call that too conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheREALJBird Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Yea I was watching that game, no excuse for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Maybe Harbaugh had Akers as his kicker in fantasy, and his league awards more points for longer field goals?:whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCSaints_fan Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 These guys seem to think the difference was marginal and the real mistake was electing to kick on 4th and short .... http://www.advancednflstats.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RansomthePasserby Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 It makes it a for sure two possession game with around 10 minutes left. Yes. Like I said, what if they had a turnover the first play after they accepted the penalty?Bottom line is their D didn't step up in the end. Had they, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Then why not just go for a field goal on first down every time you drive inside the 35? That's basically what they did. Horrible decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Then why not just go for a field goal on first down every time you drive inside the 35? That's basically what they did. Horrible decision. Exactly. It's idiotic to do that when there is 10 minutes left in the game. Hell, even with 3 minutes against Dallas and knowing that onside kicks seem to work a lot more often than you think. Back in the 70's when it took 5-6 minutes to get down field most of the time because db's would just knock your receivers down, this idea was smart(and kickers kicked for 60% from 40yds). With 2 minute offenses and all the rules favoring receivers OL blocking and qb's this is dumb thinking. A 10 point lead in the 4th is not what it used to be. All he had to do was ask Romo sits to pee. He found out LAST WEEK and his lead was 14!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 If it had just been a five-yard penalty that moved the ball from the 37 to the 32, I could see Harbaugh's decision. But this was a full 15 yarder, that moved them into substantially better position and even if they hadn't made another first down, another FG attempt probably is a relative chippie. Yeah, he's an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailToTheRedskins14 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I think it was pretty obvious that he had a great opportunity to start running the clock and playing the "kill-the-clock" game and failed. If you can't count on your RB to run up the middle 3 times, then I don't know what to tell you. Honestly a pretty stupid decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I think it was pretty obvious that he had a great opportunity to start running the clock and playing the "kill-the-clock" game and failed. If you can't count on your RB to run up the middle 3 times, then I don't know what to tell you. Honestly a pretty stupid decision. Yeah man, in the 4th quarter with a 2 score lead the clock is your biggest enemy. To be guaranteed to be taking 1 more potential drive away from them and with Akers kicking being secure in at least getting the 3 points back, it's a no brainer. I'd even argue that the 3 points could be worth giving up altogether to burn off 3 minutes, but it wouldn't matter because 99% of the time you'd at least get the 3 back. We're not talking about Gano here. If I were Shanahan I'd still go for it though, because thats how the Redskins do things now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southtown Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I remember Gibbs 1 doing something similar and actually found the article. Different situation. Skins were down but there was still clock to kill. http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1990-12-10/sports/1990344021_1_redskins-bears-defense Gibbs points Redskins to victory Coach takes FG,not penalty,as Bears fall,10-9 December 10, 1990|By Vito Stellino | Vito Stellino,Sun Staff Correspondent WASHINGTON -- To accept the points or take them off the board. That was the decision coach Joe Gibbs faced with with 2 minutes, 14 seconds left in the game yesterday at RFK Stadium. The Washington Redskins coach decided to accept Chip Lohmiller's 35-yard field goal, and it stood up for a dramatic, 10-9 victory over the Chicago Bears that virtually guaranteed the team a playoff berth for the first time in three seasons. Gibbs' decision to take the field goal and turn down an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty that would have given Washington a first down on the Bears' 9 was looking a bit shaky when Chicago gained 39 yards in two plays to advance to the Washington 46 with 25 seconds left. But the defense made one last stand, and Bears quarterback Jim Harbaugh threw a pair of incomplete passes and was sacked by Charles Mann on the final play of the game. "That's a tough call," Gibbs said of his decision to take the field goal. "I made a decision to put it on on the defense. I told our defense they probably kept me on the job today because I could have been hung from the yardarm." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aireskoi Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Bears quarterback Jim Harbaugh threw a pair of incomplete passes and was sacked by Charles Mann on the final play of the game. Well now he's lost on both occasions. I can give him an inch of respect back knowing that he lost from a coach making a very similar call. I was pissed when he didn't take the penalty and keep the ball. I had a strong feeling it would be the game at that point. I joked with a 49er buddy and told him that was Harbaugh's revenge against the team (his own now) that beat him in the Superbowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 What makes this stand out is that for all the bravado the Harbaugh brothers like to show in interviews, this was a gutlessly conservative call with 8 minutes left in the game. And it came back to bite them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodriggo Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 People can talk, "you never take points of the scoreboad" all they want, but don't you have to keep the drive going? Don't you have to atleast see if you can get a TD? To me, he showed no confidence in his offense by selecting to keep the 3 points and I'm sure the Cowboys were delighted to get off the field. Harbaugh gets my vote for boneheaded coaching decision of the week. Couldn't agree more. Absolutely no reason not to accept the penalty there and keep driving b/c at worst you're still running off the clock! Maybe if it was to go up 17 but not 10, not enough of a cushion. Just a dumb, dumb coaching move. BTW, how pathetic is Alex Smith? Seven seasons and he still sucks. I mean he's worse than Campbell, **** it, he's worse than Newton and Dalton! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeMarco Murray 29 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Up 10, in the 4th, with Tony turnover at QB and cracked ribs? I would've done the same thing. What happens if Smith throws a pick? Fumbles like Romo sits to pee did last week. He played it safe. Dallas just so happened to luck one out and get the win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Up 10, in the 4th, with Tony turnover at QB and cracked ribs? I would've done the same thing. What happens if Smith throws a pick? Fumbles like Romo sits to pee did last week.He played it safe. Dallas just so happened to luck one out and get the win. There's nothing "safe" about a 10 point cusion with over 10 minutes left in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 At the worst, you run three more plays and kill the clock, then kick it again. Harbaugh is a jackass. If he weren't playing the Cowboys I would be glad he lost. I was just thinking that. In that situation (already with a lead), I'm not sure why you wouldn't want to take more time off the clock and then kick again (if not score a TD). I have no clue what the game situation was or how confident they are in their kicker, but on the surface (and now with the luxury of hindsight) it seems pretty dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Let's not forget he had David Akers, one of the best kickers of the past decade. He also has Alex Smith, one of the worst QBs of the past decade. The kick put them up 2 scores and they should have been able to hold on. A lot of bad stuff could have happened. Plus San Fran is not an easy place to kick. My first thought was they should take the penalty but I understand why they didn't. I have a bigger problem with the way their defense played after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsciambi Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Up 10, in the 4th, with Tony turnover at QB and cracked ribs? I would've done the same thing. What happens if Smith throws a pick? Fumbles like Romo sits to pee did last week.He played it safe. Dallas just so happened to luck one out and get the win. Why bother playing the games at that point? Wouldn't want to fumble them away! It's like kicking the field goal from the 1 in OT. I don't understand why you don't try to run it in? Does Garrett have that little faith in his RB to not fumble? That worried about injuries? Injuries happen, playing scared because someone MIGHT get injured is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeMarco Murray 29 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 There's nothing "safe" about a 10 point cusion with over 10 minutes left in the game. Because before yesterday, Tony Romo sits to pee was the biggest choker in NFL History. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybrant Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 If it were the Redskins and Shanahan turned down a first down at the 22 to put 3 on the board..... I would probably throw my tv out of the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeMarco Murray 29 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Why bother playing the games at that point? Wouldn't want to fumble them away!It's like kicking the field goal from the 1 in OT. I don't understand why you don't try to run it in? Does Garrett have that little faith in his RB to not fumble? That worried about injuries? Injuries happen, playing scared because someone MIGHT get injured is ridiculous. Have you seen our Red zone offense? Last week on our first drive we ran a Fade to Dez for 6. Then next time, we ran two fades and a Romo sits to pee run for a fumble. Garrett does not like to run the ball in from the red zone. We did not run the ball well and I assumed he had faith in Bailey to just end it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Because before yesterday, Tony Romo sits to pee was the biggest choker in NFL History. :secret: He still is. This game doesn't change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Because before yesterday, Tony Romo sits to pee was the biggest choker in NFL History. No, on both counts. 1) Romo sits to pee is STILL the biggest choker in NFL history, regardless of the win yesterday 2) You'd have to have the Ravens' 2000 defense in order for a 10 point margin to be "safe" when there's damn near a quarter of football to still be played. Anyone who thinks being up by 10 points with that much time on the clock is "safe" is, quite frankly, an absolute moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.