• 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?

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...

As has been said by others, none of his game winning drives included going 80 yards in a minute with 1 timeout.
 
Here is a broad analysis that says that NE may have been better off to let NYG score around the 2 minute warning.

It also says that the expected win percentage for NYG went from 98% to 88% when he scored the TD.

LINK
 
demondeacs13 said:
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.
Click to expand...

See to me, that is what makes it a tougher decision. If the Giants were up by a point and took the TD, then the only way they could lose would be the Patriots getting the ball back, scoring a TD and 2 point conversion and going to overtime. Since they were losing, you've still got to make the FG and you're turning down sure points for almost sure points.

I was just thinking what I would want Grobe to do in that situation? I think that's probably even a tougher decision, given that college kickers, holders and snappers aren't as dependable as the pros.
 
Anyone with any kind of decision analysis background knows kneeling the ball and kicking the field goal is the correct decision. You make the decision that gives you the best chance of winning. /thread
 
No question he should have gone down at the 1. The patriots would have had to burn their final time out. There was still another down to try to run the ball in afterwards, and the kick would have been a chip shot.
 
Mike and Mike brought up a good point this morning: forgotten in all of this is how much time Nicks gave the Patriots by not fighting to stay in bounds after his completion inside the 10.

I think you take the sure thing. Regardless of percentages, there's always a chance, however slight, of a botched snap, missed hold, breakdown in blocking, offensive holding that moves the kick back, etc. That said, I understand why the Patriots did what they did.
 
SCDeac13 said:
Anyone with any kind of decision analysis background knows kneeling the ball and kicking the field goal is the correct decision. You make the decision that gives you the best chance of winning. /thread
Click to expand...

So what color pocket protector you wearing today?:thumbsup:
 
It's a risky move either way. You hate to see Brady have so much time. With that said, a lot of things can go wrong with a field goal attempt, even a short one. If I had the Giants defense I would probably trust them still. Nicks not staying in bounds gets forgotten.
 
Bradshaw is taking way too much flack for this. If they were going to play for a FG, that should have come from the coaching staff. If Eli thought it was a problem, he could have just centered the ball. Asking a running back to stop on the 1 yard line is asinine.
 
I felt like he should have not scored at the time, but even though it would have been essentially an extra point, putting it on the snapper/holder/kicker would have been a lot of pressure. They would all have been thinking "I can't fuck this up or I'll be the goat forever"
 
PhDeac said:
Bradshaw is taking way too much flack for this. If they were going to play for a FG, that should have come from the coaching staff. If Eli thought it was a problem, he could have just centered the ball. Asking a running back to stop on the 1 yard line is asinine.
Click to expand...

I agree. It is the coach's fault.
 
Sleepy said:
Here is a broad analysis that says that NE may have been better off to let NYG score around the 2 minute warning.

LINK
Click to expand...

That was my thought as well. If you're going to do it, why not give yourself more time to go the length of the field?
 
tos said:
Mike and Mike brought up a good point this morning: forgotten in all of this is how much time Nicks gave the Patriots by not fighting to stay in bounds after his completion inside the 10.
Click to expand...

Giants were accounting for just how stupid Nicks is.
 
PhillyDeac said:
TD was the right move. Never take points off the board. Never.
Click to expand...

This. I don't care if the field goal has a 99% chance of success, his running into the end zone had a 100% chance of success. You take the points - definitely because they were behind.

If they were already ahead by a point or something, then you might kneel, force them to use their last timeout, and take more time to kick the field goal, leaving them no time to score.
 
It comes down to two options:

1) Brady has to drive 80 yds for a TD in one minute with one timeout, or

2) Brady has to drive 50 yds in 20 seconds with no timeouts.
 
Les Grossman said:
It comes down to two options:

1) Brady has to drive 80 yds for a TD in one minute with one timeout, or

2) Brady has to drive 50 yds in 20 seconds with no timeouts.
Click to expand...

Honestly under those scenerios I'll take number 1. Having to score the TD I think makes a big difference. If all you need is a field goal, even with just 20 seconds left, you're having to defend the whole field, not just the endzone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top