Take the Points or End the Game with the Ball?

[MisterPinstripe]

You do not leave points on the field. If you have the opportunity to score a touchdown, and you are losing, you always take the touchdown. You do not give up sure points to take a chance on missing a field goal.

 

The only time that you stop at the 1 is if you already have the lead.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

14 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

You do not leave points on the field. If you have the opportunity to score a touchdown, and you are losing, you always take the touchdown. You do not give up sure points to take a chance on missing a field goal.

 

The only time that you stop at the 1 is if you already have the lead.

Based on? 

[MisterPinstripe]

17 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

Based on? 

I have seen teams take points off the board in past games and most of the time it has ended up coming back and biting them.

 

If you are winning you dont need the points, you can take the chance of going for a field goal and running time since missing doesnt mean you lose.

We have seen how many field goals and extra points have been missed this year, a short field goal is not a sure thing and especially with how off Hopkins has been this year.

 

We played for the field goal against the Bengals and Hopkins missed a chip shot. Hopkins has cost us at least 2 wins so far this year, hes not kicking like he was last year, so you dont put all of that pressure on him again when you can just score a TD. 

 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

9 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

I have seen teams take points off the board in past games and most of the time it has ended up coming back and biting them.

 

If you are winning you dont need the points, you can take the chance of going for a field goal and running time since missing doesnt mean you lose.

We have seen how many field goals and extra points have been missed this year, a short field goal is not a sure thing and especially with how off Hopkins has been this year.

 

We played for the field goal against the Bengals and Hopkins missed a chip shot. Hopkins has cost us at least 2 wins so far this year, hes not kicking like he was last year, so you dont put all of that pressure on him again when you can just score a TD. 

 

All good points. 

 

I still maintain that a 25-yard FG is closer to a sure thing than giving the Eagles 1:45 and a timeout to score a TD. 

[slaga]

12 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

All good points. 

 

I still maintain that a 25-yard FG is closer to a sure thing than giving the Eagles 1:45 and a timeout to score a TD. 

Although the voting is close, more people seem to disagree with you in the poll you started. It is pretty close to 50/50 though, which is where I stand but you did not put that position in the poll. Maintaining your position does not change the fact that your position is currently the less popular position to take.

[MassSkinsFan]

I think the "field goal or bust" crowd is funny. Would you have been happier if Thompson had stopped at the one, looked at everyone else, then downed the ball?

 

Have a little self-respect. Score the ****ing touchdown and dare those punks to return the favor.

 

It's football, not tiddlywinks. This cutesy bull**** is for losers. We won the game and did it right. Why are people whining about that?

[Tsailand]

1 hour ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

Based on? 

Platitudes and magical thinking.

[Stefanskins]

43 minutes ago, slaga said:

Maintaining your position does not change the fact that your position is currently the less popular position to take.

 

I like lamp...

[MisterPinstripe]

1 hour ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

All good points. 

 

I still maintain that a 25-yard FG is closer to a sure thing than giving the Eagles 1:45 and a timeout to score a TD. 

And I do think it's a fair question, I am not confident in the defense to make a stop with how poor they have been on 3rd and 4th down. But everythung that can go wrong on a kick and with Hopkins makes me not confident at all in putting the whole game on him. If the Eagles only needed a fg to beat us I might feel differently, but at least with a TD they have to drive the field.

[Tsailand]

1 hour ago, slaga said:

Maintaining your position does not change the fact that your position is currently the less popular position to take.

If your best argument for something is based on what a majority of Redskins fans think, you're probably in the wrong.

[Stefanskins]

42 minutes ago, MassSkinsFan said:

I think the "field goal or bust" crowd is funny. Would you have been happier if Thompson had stopped at the one, looked at everyone else, then downed the ball?

 

Have a little self-respect. Score the ****ing touchdown and dare those punks to return the favor.

 

It's football, not tiddlywinks. This cutesy bull**** is for losers. We won the game and did it right. Why are people whining about that?

 

I think Mass sums up my position the best. 

[skins island connection]

 

  If the running game was better, if the o-line could run block better, if Gruden wouldn't call bunch formations on the goal line, if he didn't call fade routes which haven't been KC's cup of tea, then maybe I'd sit at the 1 yd line and chew the clock, then PRAY TO ALL THATS HOLY that Hopkins doesn't chunky monkey the ball or pull it severely.

 

But that does open up other possibilities.

Say he downs it at the 1;  right then its an 18 yd FG attempt.

There COULD be a false start called on one of our guys. Back it up 5 yds, or if the refs got technical they could find a hold and throw a flag for it; back them up 10.

Lets go with the hold. Now its a 28 yd, and 1st down. With that much time left, Gruden's not going to throw the ball, he's gonna run it or most likely just down it, Gruden knows they're gonna be trying their asses off to strip the ball, so just down it which loses about 2-3 yds, then 2nd, ditto, then 3rd, ditto, so now 4th down comes and now Hopkins is looking at a 37 yd FG attempt.

 

Doesn't sound so  'chip shot' now.

 

Now, some will say those are possibilities that are not likely to happen, but do you risk it? Given this team's history with luck, being mostly bad until recently, it wouldn't be worth it to take that chance. Now I didn't like the idea of him scoring too early, but that was absolute points, where a FG attempt is just that; an attempt. If Gruden had him sit at the 1 and for whatever reason Hopkins misses that kick, ES would have to shut down; there would be so so much criticism of him not taking the points and taking a chance with a kicker who has missed some fairly easy kicks this year.

 

Maybe this helps a little, but more than likely its just more arguing points for others...lol 

[TheItalianStallion]

2 hours ago, skins island connection said:

 

  If the running game was better, if the o-line could run block better, if Gruden wouldn't call bunch formations on the goal line, if he didn't call fade routes which haven't been KC's cup of tea, then maybe I'd sit at the 1 yd line and chew the clock, then PRAY TO ALL THATS HOLY that Hopkins doesn't chunky monkey the ball or pull it severely.

 

But that does open up other possibilities.

Say he downs it at the 1;  right then its an 18 yd FG attempt.

There COULD be a false start called on one of our guys. Back it up 5 yds, or if the refs got technical they could find a hold and throw a flag for it; back them up 10.

Lets go with the hold. Now its a 28 yd, and 1st down. With that much time left, Gruden's not going to throw the ball, he's gonna run it or most likely just down it, Gruden knows they're gonna be trying their asses off to strip the ball, so just down it which loses about 2-3 yds, then 2nd, ditto, then 3rd, ditto, so now 4th down comes and now Hopkins is looking at a 37 yd FG attempt.

 

You don't chew the clock at the 1 by doing anything other than kneeling. I don't think I've ever heard of there being a false start or offensive hold on a kneel down.

[skins island connection]

1 hour ago, TheItalianStallion said:

 

You don't chew the clock at the 1 by doing anything other than kneeling. I don't think I've ever heard of there being a false start or offensive hold on a kneel down.

 

 But you HAVE heard of Murphy's Law, and its not Mark Murphy.

 I was only giving all options a little bit clearer [ ok maybe not that clear ] look at the other intangibles. Although true, I've never seen a hold on a kneel down, but if there was a chance for bad luck to happen, it would be us. But that kneel down does lose yardage, even if only a couple of yards, and this happens 3 times, that equals up to 6-9 yds, and if any Eagles player is trying to time the snap perfectly, strange things can happen.

I like Hopkins and hope he doesn't become the victim of a scapegoat and get released, but no FGs are sure things today; then you still have to factor in the slight chance the kick gets blocked. that would completely ruin this team for the rest of the season. Its better to score the TD and put the pressure on Barry and the defense. We end up on the bright side either way; the defense holds them off and we win, or the defense falls once again and then that fire on Barry's ass just turned into an inferno.

[slaga]

11 hours ago, TheItalianStallion said:

 

You don't chew the clock at the 1 by doing anything other than kneeling. I don't think I've ever heard of there being a false start or offensive hold on a kneel down.

Unless you feel kicking from the left hash mark is every bit as "automatic" as kicking from the center, between the hash marks, the offense would have to run at least one play, which opens up those possibilities.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

16 hours ago, slaga said:

Although the voting is close, more people seem to disagree with you in the poll you started. It is pretty close to 50/50 though, which is where I stand but you did not put that position in the poll. Maintaining your position does not change the fact that your position is currently the less popular position to take.

The poll is fine because I'm asking about a preference. That's a matter of opinion that really cannot be argued (though it's fun to debate). The post of mine that you quoted is more about actual odds, which are more factual. I still have not been able to find it anywhere, but would be shocked to discover that we had a lower probability of winning the game if we lined up for a 20ish-yard FG at time expired. 

15 hours ago, MassSkinsFan said:

I think the "field goal or bust" crowd is funny. Would you have been happier if Thompson had stopped at the one, looked at everyone else, then downed the ball?

 

Have a little self-respect. Score the ****ing touchdown and dare those punks to return the favor.

 

It's football, not tiddlywinks. This cutesy bull**** is for losers. We won the game and did it right. Why are people whining about that?

I think it's great if our players have that "manhood" mentality. But I'd like to know that the coaches are a little more strategic and analytical about how they make decisions. The margins for these games are razor-thin, so I like knowing that our staff is out there giving us the best chance to win. It makes me feel better than thinking that all their doing in the locker room is giving paid professionals "tough guy" chats. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

14 hours ago, skins island connection said:

 

 Say he downs it at the 1;  right then its an 18 yd FG attempt.

There COULD be a false start called on one of our guys. Back it up 5 yds, or if the refs got technical they could find a hold and throw a flag for it; back them up 10.

Lets go with the hold. Now its a 28 yd, and 1st down. With that much time left, Gruden's not going to throw the ball, he's gonna run it or most likely just down it, Gruden knows they're gonna be trying their asses off to strip the ball, so just down it which loses about 2-3 yds, then 2nd, ditto, then 3rd, ditto, so now 4th down comes and now Hopkins is looking at a 37 yd FG attempt.

 

Doesn't sound so  'chip shot' now.

 

Now, some will say those are possibilities that are not likely to happen, but do you risk it?

Yeah, that was a pretty creative way to back us up into a 37-yard FG. I would agree that I'd be sweating bullets if those chain of events occurred. But odds of all those things happening to put us in that situation are so much less than the odds of our swiss cheese defense giving up a TD to a QB that entered that drive already having completed nearly 30 passes in the game. 

15 hours ago, MisterPinstripe said:

And I do think it's a fair question, I am not confident in the defense to make a stop with how poor they have been on 3rd and 4th down. But everythung that can go wrong on a kick and with Hopkins makes me not confident at all in putting the whole game on him. If the Eagles only needed a fg to beat us I might feel differently, but at least with a TD they have to drive the field.

As a funny aside...

 

In both the Lions and Eagles game I would have felt much, much better if the opponent had the ball down 3 (instead of 4 and 5, respectively). Something about a team in the final minute or two having four downs nothing to lose petrifies me against our D. If they only needed 3, at some point in our territory they would become a little more careful and protect the FG attempt. 

[slaga]

12 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

The poll is fine because I'm asking about a preference. That's a matter of opinion that really cannot be argued (though it's fun to debate). The post of mine that you quoted is more about actual odds, which are more factual. I still have not been able to find it anywhere, but would be shocked to discover that we had a lower probability of winning the game if we lined up for a 20ish-yard FG at time expired. 

 

I doubt you will ever find the odds as they change from week to week / opponent to opponent / year to year. The data is too sporadic to truly nail down the odds to any certainty, especially for that specific situation. Good luck finding them. What were the odds the Redskins would win the game last year against the Bucs when they were down 24-0? Before the 2015 season started or even at the 1/2 way point, what were the odds Kirk Cousins would hold the single season total passing yards record for the Redskins at the end of the year? What are the odds a team with a historically bad defense, like the Redskins, of having a chance to make the playoffs this late in the season? Stuff happens that goes against the odds in football all of the time.

 

Speaking of probability, you mention a 95% success rate for field goals made in the lower 20s yard range but just how many of those field goals had the game riding on them? Meaning, what is the success rate where if the kicker makes it his team wins and if he does not his team loses? I doubt the success rate in that situation is also 95%, but that is just a hunch on my part. I have no way to prove it.

 

 

[MassSkinsFan]

1 hour ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

I think it's great if our players have that "manhood" mentality. But I'd like to know that the coaches are a little more strategic and analytical about how they make decisions. The margins for these games are razor-thin, so I like knowing that our staff is out there giving us the best chance to win. It makes me feel better than thinking that all their doing in the locker room is giving paid professionals "tough guy" chats. 

 

Listen tough guy...  

 

The coaches probably did give them the best chance to win. They were obviously not trying to score right away. If they wanted an instant TD we'd have seen a pass, right? But, when the run worked out, CT did what he's conditioned to do - he ran it home. At that point the issue is moot - we are up by 5 and need to defend, period.

 

I'm guessing the strategy in place was to run it several times and see if they could get a first down. Then keep running it and see if, after running the clock down almost to the end, they could score a TD. If that couldn't happen by 4th down, then a FG attempt. The problem is that the first run was a TD - definitely not part of the plan.

[skins island connection]

12 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

Yeah, that was a pretty creative way to back us up into a 37-yard FG. I would agree that I'd be sweating bullets if those chain of events occurred. But odds of all those things happening to put us in that situation are so much less than the odds of our swiss cheese defense giving up a TD to a QB that entered that drive already having completed nearly 30 passes in the game. 

As a funny aside...

 

 

 

 Yea, I know;  I was just pointing out the murders row of possibilities. If that ever happened I'd grab all of my guns and ammo and head to the 'secret spot'. OK, maybe not ALL of my guns; I'd need a Surburban.

 But if it got them thinking of at least 1 or 2 of those happening then it could create a lot of bad vibes on-field.

[Sekhmet187]

Well lets say they down it at the 1. 

Kirk kneels and loses 2 on 1st down.

Then kirk kneels again on 2nd down and loses 2.

 

Its now 3rd and goal at the 5. They line up for a 22 yard FG. Okay thats not bad. But what if they get a false start or hold? Then its a 27 or 32 yard FG with the game and potentially season on the line. Thats very possible with this team.

 

Now imagine the snap is muffed on 3rd and they fall on it for a loss of 7. Now its a 34 or 39 yard FG with the game and season on the line.

 

 

Or better yet, imagine 3rd and goal at the 5 with the FG team out. High snap and no one gets control until a LB falls on it and its game over. 

 

Take the points.

 

[TheItalianStallion]

2 hours ago, Sekhmet187 said:

Well lets say they down it at the 1. 

Kirk kneels and loses 2 on 1st down.

Then kirk kneels again on 2nd down and loses 2.

 

Its now 3rd and goal at the 5. They line up for a 22 yard FG. Okay thats not bad. But what if they get a false start or hold? Then its a 27 or 32 yard FG with the game and potentially season on the line. Thats very possible with this team.

 

Now imagine the snap is muffed on 3rd and they fall on it for a loss of 7. Now its a 34 or 39 yard FG with the game and season on the line.

 

 

Or better yet, imagine 3rd and goal at the 5 with the FG team out. High snap and no one gets control until a LB falls on it and its game over. 

 

Take the points.

 

 

You don't lose 2 yards per kneel down, and false starts or holds on FGs are very rare, as are high snaps.

 

Now imagine our D allowing our opponent to rapidly move down the field and get into scoring position...wait, no need to imagine. It actually happened.

 

If what people say is true that Gruden wanted Kirk to communicate to the players not to score if given the chance, the more I think about it, the more I think he was right and that Kirk made a big mistake in not conveying Gruden's message. We dodged a bullet and nearly lost the game over that. You can't count on your borderline pro bowl pass rusher being matched up against the backup of a backup very often.

 

I think TD is right: the probability of something going wrong on a series of kneel downs starting at the 1 and a subsequent 20ish yard FG is much lower than the odds of our D giving up a long TD drive in a short amount of time. In fact it nearly happened.

[KDawg]

And we nearly beat the Bengals in OT on a field goal attempt.

 

Nearly only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

39 minutes ago, KDawg said:

And we nearly beat the Bengals in OT on a field goal attempt.

 

Nearly only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. 

 

Yes, the way that game played out was unfortunate. I'm still convinced that the penalties as we got into FG range spooked Gruden. We committed two penalties on one Kelley run from the Cincy 19 and I think Gruden was worried that we might continue to move backwards. So, once we got back inside the 20, he seemed ready to kick. 

[KDawg]

2 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

Yes, the way that game played out was unfortunate. I'm still convinced that the penalties as we got into FG range spooked Gruden. We committed two penalties on one Kelley run from the Cincy 19 and I think Gruden was worried that we might continue to move backwards. So, once we got back inside the 20, he seemed ready to kick. 

 

Wasnt my point. 

 

My point was specific to the post that I quoted. He said we nearly lost. 

 

Fact is that we didnt lose.