• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Bradsha'w's TD, should he or shouldn't he?

liveanddiedeac

liveanddiedeac

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2011
Messages
21,488
Reaction score
3,019
The Super Bowl winning TD scored by Bradshaw last night has been portrayed over-whelmingly as the wrong move by the sports media today. However, I just don't think it's that clear. It's being compared to Brian Westbrook taking a knee at the 1 yard line against the Cowboys late in the game a few years ago. However, wasn't the Eagles winning by one point at the time? So, the only way the Eagles could've lost is if the Cowboys had gotten the ball back and scored a TD and a 2-point conversion. However, last night the Giants were losing by 2 points. If Bradshaw's takes the knee and the field goal attempt gets blocked or the holder fumbles the snap or even the very small chance Tynes misses the kick, can you imagine looking back and realizing you didn't take a walk-in TD that would've put you up 4 points with less than a minute left in the Super Bowl? I just don't think it was the no-brainer decision that people are making it out to be.
 
Wrong move. Definitely take the FG, given the option.

Smart by Belichick though. I got so excited when I saw them let him in.
 
Right decision or wrong, the Giants won so neither he, nor the team, nor the fans, nor the sports media should really care.
 
Had he went down, a FG would have been equivalent (if not easier than) to an extra point. Since 1984 (when defenders were banned from taking running leaps at the line of scrimmage), the success rate has never dropped below 95%, and most commonly, it's above 98% (2008=99.6%).

You then have to weigh that against the chance Tom Brady leads his team to a TD with 2 (I think two, maybe one) timeouts.

I would rather be kicking an "extra point" as time expires.
 
Really hard to argue not taking the points. I guess he could have taken the knee on the one inch line and then try to run it in next play (forcing NE to use the last TO) and taking the clock down further, but alot can go wrong on a FG as well. They won, so who cares.
 
Scoring the touchdown was absolutely the right play. Not scoring would have been a huge pussy move. Its the Super Bowl. If your defense can't keep a team from going 80 yards with 1 timeout with a minute to go, then you weren't supposed to win.
 
AnonymousDeac said:
Had he went down, a FG would have been equivalent (if not easier than) to an extra point. Since 1984 (when defenders were banned from taking running leaps at the line of scrimmage), the success rate has never dropped below 95%, and most commonly, it's above 98% (2008=99.6%).

You then have to weigh that against the chance Tom Brady leads his team to a TD with 2 (I think two, maybe one) timeouts.

I would rather be kicking an "extra point" as time expires.
Click to expand...

I get that, but it could still be missed. If the Giants were up by one point, then it's a no brainer, but since they were losing I just don't think it's the no-brainer like a lot of people are making it out to be. I mean there's a 95 percent or more chance they make the kick, but there was 100 percent chance Bradshaw scores the TD if he doesn't take a knee, of course you'd have to subtract from that the odds of Brady taking his team 80 yards to a TD with about 50 seconds left and 1 timeout. Just think a decent argument can be made for both sides on this one.
 
DeaconSig said:
Scoring the touchdown was absolutely the right play. Not scoring would have been a huge pussy move. Its the Super Bowl. If your defense can't keep a team from going 80 yards with 1 timeout with a minute to go, then you weren't supposed to win.
Click to expand...

"Brady has orchestrated 31 game-winning drives to break a tie or take the lead in the fourth quarter or overtime. Six of his game-winning efforts have come in the postseason, where he has played in 19 games.
Brady led a game-winning drive to break a tie or take the lead in the fourth quarter of each of the Patriots' three Super Bowl victories, becoming the only quarterback in NFL history to lead three such game-winning drives in the Super Bowl."

you do not give him back the ball when you could take a >95% chip shot for the win.
 
AnonymousDeac said:
Since 1984 (when defenders were banned from taking running leaps at the line of scrimmage)
Click to expand...

I didn't know this - then how did this pass?

polamalu-leaping-sack-superman-o.gif
 
AnonymousDeac said:
Had he went down, a FG would have been equivalent (if not easier than) to an extra point. Since 1984 (when defenders were banned from taking running leaps at the line of scrimmage), the success rate has never dropped below 95%, and most commonly, it's above 98% (2008=99.6%).

You then have to weigh that against the chance Tom Brady leads his team to a TD with 2 (I think two, maybe one) timeouts.

I would rather be kicking an "extra point" as time expires.
Click to expand...

That percentage has to be weighed against the situation. The nerves involved for the line, the snapper, the holder, and the kicker can't be compared to a normal extra point. Further, the defensive effort made during a typical extra point is almost nil...that would not be the case when we're talking a game winning kick for the Super Bowl.
 
liveanddiedeac said:
I get that, but it could still be missed. If the Giants were up by one point, then it's a no brainer, but since they were losing I just don't think it's the no-brainer like a lot of people are making it out to be. I mean there's a 95 percent or more chance they make the kick, but there was 100 percent chance Bradshaw scores the TD if he doesn't take a knee, of course you'd have to subtract from that the odds of Brady taking his team 80 yards to a TD with about 50 seconds left and 1 timeout. Just think a decent argument can be made for both sides on this one.
Click to expand...

In 2011, there were 1207 XPs attempted, and only 7 missed. 99.4% success rate.

This means, if you think that Tom Brady could drive the field and get a TD just once out of 150 attempts, then kneeling it and taking that XP was the correct play.
 
ipitytheblue said:
"Brady has orchestrated 31 game-winning drives to break a tie or take the lead in the fourth quarter or overtime. Six of his game-winning efforts have come in the postseason, where he has played in 19 games.
Brady led a game-winning drive to break a tie or take the lead in the fourth quarter of each of the Patriots' three Super Bowl victories, becoming the only quarterback in NFL history to lead three such game-winning drives in the Super Bowl."

you do not give him back the ball when you could take a >95% chip shot for the win.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but game winning drives in the 4th quarter don't take into account the particular situation they were in last night. How many of those 31 did they only need a FG and how many of those did he have significantly more time on the clock to work with? Last night, Brady had to take his team 80 yards with about 50 seconds left, one time out and he had to have a TD, not a FG.
 
RacerDeac said:
That percentage has to be weighed against the situation. The nerves involved for the line, the snapper, the holder, and the kicker can't be compared to a normal extra point. Further, the defensive effort made during a typical extra point is almost nil...that would not be the case when we're talking a game winning kick for the Super Bowl.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But you also have to weigh that the players are 100% focused on this XP while a lot of the missed ones in the season may have been due to simply being nonchalant. But even if there is a greater chance he misses due to the pressure, how much greater?

Let's say it is then twice as difficult to kick the extra point? Three, four, maybe five times as difficult. That's a lot for just nerves but even saying it is 5 times more difficult (which is absurd), your success rate is still 97%.

Still probably better than giving the ball to Brady.
 
ipitytheblue said:
I'm just saying I don't give Brady and the Pats Offense that chance.
Click to expand...

Chan the man Gailey agrees with this.

All you need to know to judge this play from the Giants' perspective is... the Patriots' perspective. They wanted to let him in to get the ball back. Belicheat is not dumb. Therefore the Giants' optimal play is stopping on the one, killing the clock, and taking the chip shot FG.
 
ipitytheblue said:
I'm just saying I don't give Brady and the Pats Offense that chance.
Click to expand...

No, I get what you're saying and I get why you might decide to take the knee and attempt the FG. I just think there's good arguments that can be made on both sides.
 
Given that you're losing with a minute and change in the Super Bowl, I'd say you just have to take the points.

That having been said, I was drunkenly SCREAMING at my TV for Bradshaw to go down because I had 8 and 7 in my squares game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top