Packers decision to kick field goal late - can anyone explain it?

Donate To GopherHole
WinLoseOrTy said:
Hate the Packers but I don't think the call was that misguided. They had already struggled in goal to goal situation throughout the game and couldn't have felt great about their chances.

The thing to remember is even had they scored and gotten the two point conversation, you would still be playing to hope the GOAT QB doesn't drive for a game winning field goal with all his timeouts (not a high value bet) or hope for overtime (basically 50/50 proposition).

Cutting the deficit to five, and then hoping your defense can get a stop with all of your timeouts remaining was in my opinion the correct play. That way if you get the ball back you can win the game with a touchdown. No 50/50 overtime coin flip.

The Tampa returner going down in front of the 2 minute warning was a terrible decision. It gave Green Bay and extra timeout and could have been a disaster. Luckily, Tampa flipped that mistake and threw on 1st down. Too many teams just run the ball up the middle in front of two minute warning. The clock is going to stop regardless so might as well go for yardage and throw.

The Packers purposely jumping offsides on 2nd and 1 was likewise brilliant. Tampa should have declined. Resetting the downs without having to burn a timeout was Green Bay's only play. Bucs gave them a lifeline by allowing it.
Click to expand...
This makes no sense to me. You are either trusting your defense to stop Brady when trailing by 5, or trusting your defense when tied.

If rather try to stop Brady tied.
 

USAF said:
This makes no sense to me. You are either trusting your defense to stop Brady when trailing by 5, or trusting your defense when tied.

If rather try to stop Brady tied.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Plus, the horrible defense on last play of first half was brutal.
 

Word said:
KFAN was saying this morning it was a 2.5% greater chance of winning by kicking the field goal if you went by the numbers. But I would assume those numbers are some sort of average for the entire league. You have to consider you have an above average offense and above average quarterback, so maybe for that situation kicking the field goal isn't smart.

Oh well, I loved the result!!!
Click to expand...
I believe the %'s. They had to score on 4th down, AND make the two AND stop Tampa from scoring with over 2 minutes left AND then win in OT. If you give all of those things 50/50 chances, their odds of winning by going for it were 6.5%. Even factoring in their chances of getting the ball back if they failed or missed the two, their odds of winning by going for it were probably 10-15%. OTOH, If they could just get a stop, Rodgers getting them a winning TD would have felt almost inevitable.

All that said, had they really seen anything all day that made them think they were going to get the ball back?
 

I had seen it too many times where a team down by 4 or 5 will go for the TD with about 6-7 minutes left.
I think that's often the wrong call.
Going for the FG with 6 or more minutes is different.
With just over 2 minutes and Tom Brady...
Too little margin of error.
At least if you go for it and don't get it, you pin TB deep where they become more one dimensional. (Especially on a day when Brady has thrown a few picks).

It's like coaches aren't even watching the games or considering their opponents when they make these decisions.
 

This game will be talked about for years like some of the Vikes misfortunes in missing going to the Superbowl three times based on one fateful ply. I am still sick from all the Vikings foibles over the years.

What doesn't make sense to Rodgers is they didn't draft any WRs in a WR rich draft. Instead, they traded up and drafted QB Jordan Love.

I think Rodgers unhappiness after losing the NFC Championship is percolating.

To Vikings fans, will you like a trade bringing Rodgers to the Vikes? I know it will not happen. Rodgers is on the hook for three more years.

I am so done with the psycophantic Kirk Cousins.

Getting Rodgers even at 37 maybe too costly.
 


hungan1 said:
This game will be talked about for years like some of the Vikes misfortunes in missing going to the Superbowl three times based on one fateful ply. I am still sick from all the Vikings foibles over the years.

What doesn't make sense to Rodgers is they didn't draft any WRs in a WR rich draft. Instead, they traded up and drafted QB Jordan Love.

I think Rodgers unhappiness after losing the NFC Championship is percolating.

To Vikings fans, will you like a trade bringing Rodgers to the Vikes? I know it will not happen. Rodgers is on the hook for three more years.

I am so done with the psycophantic Kirk Cousins.

Getting Rodgers even at 37 maybe too costly.
Click to expand...
are you saying I can go Cousins straight up for Rodgers? That's a no brainer. His extra 6 million in cap is absolutely nothing and you do that in a heart beat. In reality, the Vikes are in flux and either need to go 2 routes
1. All in if they think they can win now which means you think you have the pieces and are missing one thing. That thing could be a guy like Rodgers and his better escapability versus Cousins. Issue with that is you just paid Cook a boatload but I could see him being used like Kamara in NO and working fine
2. Trade Cousins and try ride a QB on a low cap deal and use the extra money to spend on the OL and DL to win with you running game and defense.
Right now they're in the middle ground and they're not a good football team and will continue to be so unless they make a big change.
 

USAF said:
And X% of the time you DO get the ball back.
Click to expand...
In this case

0% of the time


You need 1 touchdown to have a chance to tie or win the game.

You get one, maybe two attempts

You give up one attempt.

Whoops
 

Face The Facts said:
I had seen it too many times where a team down by 4 or 5 will go for the TD with about 6-7 minutes left.
I think that's often the wrong call.
Going for the FG with 6 or more minutes is different.
With just over 2 minutes and Tom Brady...
Too little margin of error.
At least if you go for it and don't get it, you pin TB deep where they become more one dimensional. (Especially on a day when Brady has thrown a few picks).

It's like coaches aren't even watching the games or considering their opponents when they make these decisions.
Click to expand...
It’s a totally different situation if they are down 5 or 6 instead of 8.


if down 5 or 6 you only need a field goal on your next drive.



in this case they need a touchdown.
they kicked a field goal so on their next drive they only needed a touchdown...whoops
 

Face The Facts said:
At least if you go for it and don't get it, you pin TB deep where they become more one dimensional. (Especially on a day when Brady has thrown a few picks).
Click to expand...
With TB up by 8, they wouldn't need to score and could grind out the game with Fournette. No need to pass the ball. If GB go for it and don't get it, the game would have ended right there.
 



jonnyganas said:
With TB up by 8, they wouldn't need to score and could grind out the game with Fournette. No need to pass the ball. If GB go for it and don't get it, the game would have ended right there.
Click to expand...

If they go for the TD and don't get it TB has the ball at their own 8 and the Packers have the two minute warning and all their timeouts to work with. TB would likely be conservative given the field position (although not a total guarantee). If the Packers force a 3 and out then they get the ball back around midfield still needing the TD/2p but having almost 2 minutes to work with.

By kicking the field goal they give Tampa a chance to start their series outside of the shadow of their own endzone which gives them the ability to open things up a little more in their effort to get the game sealing first down. GB caught a break with TB getting a shorter KO return but even then, starting at your 17 is better then starting inside your own 10.

No matter what GB was going to have to get a defensive stop against Brady. Knowing that, you do whatever you can to score while down near the goal line because giving the ball back to the GOAT knowing he just needs a first down or two feels like a losing proposition to me.

Just for fun, say the PI call isn't made and Tampa is forced to punt. GB likely gets the ball back deep in their own territory, with 1 timeout and about 90 seconds to work with, STILL needing a TD. The fact that they still need a TD makes the defensive side of things much easier for TB.

This is why nearly everyone commenting on the situation (including Rodgers) thinks they should have gone for it on 4th down. Rodgers basically said that if he had known they weren't going to go for it on 4th he would have called a different play on 3rd down. So clearly he was in the mindset that they were in 4 down territory and going for the potential tying TD/2pt.
 

howeda7 said:
I believe the %'s. They had to score on 4th down, AND make the two AND stop Tampa from scoring with over 2 minutes left AND then win in OT. If you give all of those things 50/50 chances, their odds of winning by going for it were 6.5%. Even factoring in their chances of getting the ball back if they failed or missed the two, their odds of winning by going for it were probably 10-15%. OTOH, If they could just get a stop, Rodgers getting them a winning TD would have felt almost inevitable.

All that said, had they really seen anything all day that made them think they were going to get the ball back?
Click to expand...

Given a choice, it's boolah-boolah or death. They picked death by boolah-boolah!
No guts, no glory.
 

howeda7 said:
I believe the %'s. They had to score on 4th down, AND make the two AND stop Tampa from scoring with over 2 minutes left AND then win in OT. If you give all of those things 50/50 chances, their odds of winning by going for it were 6.5%. Even factoring in their chances of getting the ball back if they failed or missed the two, their odds of winning by going for it were probably 10-15%. OTOH, If they could just get a stop, Rodgers getting them a winning TD would have felt almost inevitable.

All that said, had they really seen anything all day that made them think they were going to get the ball back?
Click to expand...

I mean if they scored the TD, they two point conversion would have been nice but if you fail, you have to stop TB and kick a FG, not stop them and score a TD.
 

MNVCGUY said:
No matter what GB was going to have to get a defensive stop against Brady. Knowing that, you do whatever you can to score while down near the goal line because giving the ball back to the GOAT knowing he just needs a first down or two feels like a losing proposition to me.
Click to expand...
Fair and valid points. One thing I think is being undersold is the difference between stopping a team who is driving to win a game vs one who is trying to run out the clock. The mindsets are totally different and too many teams get too conservative when trying to run out the final minutes.

Tampa, to their credit, played to win the game on the final drive. It worked out perfectly. Had they ran up the middle 3 plays, Green Bay gets the ball back at their 30 with 1:45 left and 1 timeout. Strong chance Packers win the game.
 



WinLoseOrTy said:
Fair and valid points. One thing I think is being undersold is the difference between stopping a team who is driving to win a game vs one who is trying to run out the clock. The mindsets are totally different and too many teams get too conservative when trying to run out the final minutes.

Tampa, to their credit, played to win the game on the final drive. It worked out perfectly. Had they ran up the middle 3 plays, Green Bay gets the ball back at their 30 with 1:45 left and 1 timeout. Strong chance Packers win the game.
Click to expand...

This is where Brady should have been a massive factor in the decision for the Packers. Brady had a rough second half so him trying to drive the team down to score points scares me far less then the thought of him running safe plays and making good decisions in order to move the ball enough to kill the clock.

Many teams do get ultra conservative when trying to kill the clock because they don't trust their QB to be smart with the ball. But when you have a guy like Brady out there the pass is still very much on the table knowing he is going to make good reads most of the time.

I just keep coming back to this, charts be damned, in what world is it wise to give Tom Brady the ball with a lead and about 2 minutes on the clock? Even at 43 I will take Brady in that situation everytime. Kind of like that commercial where the kid picks Charles Barkley in the pickup game against other kids. :)
 

MNVCGUY said:
This is where Brady should have been a massive factor in the decision for the Packers. Brady had a rough second half so him trying to drive the team down to score points scares me far less then the thought of him running safe plays and making good decisions in order to move the ball enough to kill the clock.

Many teams do get ultra conservative when trying to kill the clock because they don't trust their QB to be smart with the ball. But when you have a guy like Brady out there the pass is still very much on the table knowing he is going to make good reads most of the time.

I just keep coming back to this, charts be damned, in what world is it wise to give Tom Brady the ball with a lead and about 2 minutes on the clock? Even at 43 I will take Brady in that situation everytime. Kind of like that commercial where the kid picks Charles Barkley in the pickup game against other kids. :)
Click to expand...

-looks at chart-

Hey guys, chart says this Brady guy is pretty good...
 

jonnyganas said:
As a Packer fan, I agree. I actually give credit to TJ for selling the hold. A heads up play by one of my favorite Gophers.

I'm frustrated more with the PI that was not called throughout the game, namely the one during Rodgers' INT. That was a big swing points-wise and likely affected the game more than whether or not they go for it on 4th and goal toward the end.
Click to expand...
I saw that the Packer's draft this year only had two players that saw snaps in the post season. As someone who doesn't dislike the Pack, I would have loved to see Tyler in the mix for the Pack this year. Their WR depth chart is much shorter than Tampa's. I had to pull for Tampa as Tyler is my favorite Gopher.
I don't know if he oversold it, but he almost did. The way he sold it was annoying to a lot of Packer fans but the flag came so late, that maybe he needed to?
 

WorkingMyTailOff said:
I saw that the Packer's draft this year only had two players that saw snaps in the post season. As someone who doesn't dislike the Pack, I would have loved to see Tyler in the mix for the Pack this year. Their WR depth chart is much shorter than Tampa's. I had to pull for Tampa as Tyler is my favorite Gopher.
I don't know if he oversold it, but he almost did. The way he sold it was annoying to a lot of Packer fans but the flag came so late, that maybe he needed to?
Click to expand...
TJ sold it very well. Totally was holding on the Packers, but TJ's dive makes me think he used to play soccer in Europe.
 

MNVCGUY said:
This is where Brady should have been a massive factor in the decision for the Packers. Brady had a rough second half so him trying to drive the team down to score points scares me far less then the thought of him running safe plays and making good decisions in order to move the ball enough to kill the clock.

Many teams do get ultra conservative when trying to kill the clock because they don't trust their QB to be smart with the ball. But when you have a guy like Brady out there the pass is still very much on the table knowing he is going to make good reads most of the time.

I just keep coming back to this, charts be damned, in what world is it wise to give Tom Brady the ball with a lead and about 2 minutes on the clock? Even at 43 I will take Brady in that situation everytime. Kind of like that commercial where the kid picks Charles Barkley in the pickup game against other kids. :)
Click to expand...

What if the Packers went for it and scored a TD and made the two-point conversion? What if TJ caught the winning TD with one of his clutch catches in OT? He will be legendary. The Gophers will get free publicity in the media. We will be talking about it for decades.

TJ and AWjr still have a chance to make a name for themselves and the Gophers in the big stage in two weeks! I think this will make it the highlight of the Covid pandemic in Gopherland.
 

jonnyganas said:
With TB up by 8, they wouldn't need to score and could grind out the game with Fournette. No need to pass the ball. If GB go for it and don't get it, the game would have ended right there.
Click to expand...
That is literally an argument against the point you’re trying to make. Up 8 Tampa is more likely to run the ball and be conservative making you more likely to stop them and get the ball back
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
-looks at chart-

Hey guys, chart says this Brady guy is pretty good...
Click to expand...

Should be a second page on the chart. You read through the analytics but see a little note at the end telling you to go to the next page. On the next page is simply the words - If the other team has the Greatest QB to ever play the game on their roster, disregard analytics and don't give him the ball back with a lead.
 

jonnyganas said:
As a Packer fan, I agree. I actually give credit to TJ for selling the hold. A heads up play by one of my favorite Gophers.

I'm frustrated more with the PI that was not called throughout the game, namely the one during Rodgers' INT. That was a big swing points-wise and likely affected the game more than whether or not they go for it on 4th and goal toward the end.
Click to expand...
The holding call on the int that wasn't called, the DB didn't reach outside his frame to grab the WR on the shoulder pad, which they didn't call all game on either team. Kind of like holding by an OL - if the hands stay inside the framework of the body they don't call holding. GB got away with this as well all during the game.
The call on TJ was different in that King had to reach out to pull on the jersey/undershirt. He was outside the framework therefore holding had to be called. I don't recall a TB or GB defender reaching out like that during the game before that play.
Both plays should be flagged for holding but the NFL has decided that the first one isn't going to be called during the playoffs it seems, just like they have now allowed OL to hold every play as long as they don't reach outside their framework to do so.
 

I think the GB coach is a closet Viking was simply looking for a way to rip the hearts out of the Packer fans.
 

The worst decision there wasn't not going for it, it was made even worse by the combination of then not going for the onside kick. The Packers' biggest enemy at that point in the game was obviously time. You need either one lucky score and a lucky 2-pt conversion, or you need a FG and any TD later. But they had to get another possession. Kicking off deep was far less likely to accomplish that against an offense calmly led by the great Tom Brady than taking a chance at getting the ball back via onside kick. In the likely event that the onside kick would fail, at least Brady would have less room to move forward and control the clock. The Bucs would also be more apt to just RUTM to waste clock on that side of the field, knowing they could pin the Packers deep in case they didn't get the first down. A Packers failure of logic is a gain for two former Gophers, and I'm happy for them.
 

cncmin said:
The worst decision there wasn't not going for it, it was made even worse by the combination of then not going for the onside kick. The Packers' biggest enemy at that point in the game was obviously time. You need either one lucky score and a lucky 2-pt conversion, or you need a FG and any TD later. But they had to get another possession. Kicking off deep was far less likely to accomplish that against an offense calmly led by the great Tom Brady than taking a chance at getting the ball back via onside kick. In the likely event that the onside kick would fail, at least Brady would have less room to move forward and control the clock. The Bucs would also be more apt to just RUTM to waste clock on that side of the field, knowing they could pin the Packers deep in case they didn't get the first down. A Packers failure of logic is a gain for two former Gophers, and I'm happy for them.
Click to expand...

With all their timeouts and the 2 minute warning I don't think it was a mistake to kick it deep, and also think most coaches would opt for the same option.

By kicking the field goal they signified that they were going to count on their defense to make a stop. Knowing they need that stop, the best bet is to try and pin Tampa as deep as possible so that when Tampa punts, they get the best possible field position to try and get the winning score.
 

Just doing my best to keep an exasperating thread at the top of the list.
 



Wasn’t a terrible decision really to kick it. If it wasn’t for an obvious terrible holding on 3rd and 9 by GB DB, he gets the ball back with a better chance to win.
 

Jiminy Crickets! Didn't one of the mock drafts have Rashad Bateman going to the Packers?

I am happy for Rashad. Don't get me wrong...
 

I think the decision to kick or go for it was close. It was 4th and like 8 if I remember correctly and Green Bay would have needed to convert the 2 point try as well. Even in a best case scenario, the ball goes back to Tampa Bay needing only a FG to win in regulation with about 2 minutes left. The Green Bay defense was going to need a stop either way, and kicking the FG opened up the opportunity to win in regulation if they got that stop. Obviously the other side of the coin is that you have Aaron Rodgers and he ends up not touching the ball again in a one score game. I find the decision to kick here far more justifiable than Zimmer not kicking the FG in Seattle (even though analytics liked that one) and Green Bay should be far more mad about the ridiculous TD they gifted Tampa before halftime.

Tyler drawing the game winning PI was the best of a no win situation for me (the Packers or Brady were going to the Super Bowl). Brady threw a terrible ball on that play too, just lucky Tyler was held.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom