OT: Do you let the Giants score? If so, when?
Not caring much who won yesterday, I thought that the most interesting part of the game was the Patriots' decision to let the Giants score. Reactions seem to fall anywhere from "That was crazy" to "They should have done it sooner." The latter makes more sense, I think - and specifically that the Pats should have let NY score on first down at the 18.
Some quick facts (one based on my memory of the game):
* CNNSI.com lists Giants' kicker Lawrence Tynes' stats on the year as 3-4 from 30-39 and 12-12 from 1-29.
*IIRC, the Giants had the ball at the 18 on first down with two minutes left.
*Manning has been historically good in the 4th quarter this year.
*The Patriots had the 31st rated defense in the league, but were much better (15th) when it came to points.
My thoughts: The Giants seemed very unlikely to end up with a 35 yard attempt when they were at the 18 with two minutes left. They were moving the ball with little trouble. I don't think, then, that we can look at the situation as one in which giving up a touchdown there is giving surrendering a 25% chance of winning (1/4 being the amount of field goals from 30-39 that Tynes missed). Even if the Giants had stalled at the 18, they were likely to use up a lot of time before they kicked that 35 yard FG (and/or caused the Pats to exhaust their timeouts). The Pats would only have needed a FG in response to a NY field goal, of course, but the value of that diminishes as every second ticks off of the clock.
Letting the Giants score a TD with roughly two minutes left gives you the ball back in Brady's hands with two timeouts and a realistic amount of time. Letting NY score with one minute, on the other hand, didn't leave you enough time. Finally, letting Tynes kick a 35-yard field goal as time expires gives you, IMO, the smallest chance of wininning (25% based on his performance during the year?).
Your thoughts?
Two final notes: I realize that Bill Belichick's socks know more about football than I do. I'm just throwing this out for fun.
Second, I realize that this probably came up yesterday at some point on the board. However, many of us were not on the board then because we were watching the game with friends and family or manning the international space station.
February 6th, 2012 at 12:47 PM ^
I'm more interested in the Giants decision to run the ball. Why didn't they just take 3 knees and then kick? Not sure why the announcers didn't point this out either.
No doubt in my mind NE should've let them in sooner than they did, but they still made the right call on the play where they did let them in. If they hadn't blown a TO on that challenge, they would've been in much better shape there, but hindsight is 20/20 and all that. Still, I think Coughlin made a bigger mistake in running than Belicheck did in waiting as long as he did to let them in. They definitely should've let them in on that 1st and goal.
February 6th, 2012 at 12:51 PM ^
Coughlin said last night in an interview that kicking is not a sure thing and cited what happened to the Ravens in the AFC championship game.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:12 PM ^
that "12 man on the feild" call, yes they got a lil closer to scoring, but they also got a 10 sec run off! i wish they would of put that time back on the clock, totally changed the game
February 6th, 2012 at 1:19 PM ^
It's slightly easier to play defense with 12 men on the field. Maybe NYG tried to do that because it would only cost them 5 yars and they would get more clock ran off.
/conspiracy
February 6th, 2012 at 1:30 PM ^
Honestly, given how the rules work, with time running off and only a five yard penalty, why not run 15 guys out there for all but the last play on end of game drives? Could the refs call unsportsmanlike conduct if a team were to do that?
February 6th, 2012 at 1:37 PM ^
on huge plays right before a half or end of the game what do you have to lose? 5 yards? and you do drain time off the clock.which is a LOT more important
February 6th, 2012 at 1:53 PM ^
When they got called for the 12-men, it made me realize that, save for the final play, it was to the Giants distinct advantage to just throw everybody on the sideline out there and take the penalty. The Pats need a touchdown, and time is more important than the 5 yards, so until the penalty would extend the game (untimed play if there is a penalty on the defense), why not just load the field up?
Of course, going overboard on that would almost certainly result in a major rule change with the ensuiing outcry, but doing it with 12 or 13 and passing it off as a mistake, why not? I do kind of wonder if Coughlin did that on purpose, but I'm sure he'd never admit it if he did.
February 6th, 2012 at 2:48 PM ^
Brady could have just clocked the ball knowing that there were 12 men on the field and maybe one second would have elapsed. It does require that he was able to realize that there were in fact 12 men on the field. If there are 15 players on the field, then it's very obvious and he could have instantly clocked the ball and gained 5 yards. With just 12 men, there's a good chance that the QB won't notice. It was a good scheme by NY (if it was intentional.) NY could have left 12 men on the field play after play as Brady clocked the ball, but it's really only a good strategy if the QB doesn't notice and throws it deep, wasting clock.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:54 PM ^
Why is that a five-yard penalty in the NFL? It's 15 yards in college, which seems to make more sense. Playing a down with 12 guys is a major advantage and should be harshly discouraged.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:31 PM ^
Brady chose to view it as a free play and throw the ball into the end zone. He also could have checked down underneath, picked up 10-20 yards, saved a few more seconds, and declined the penalty. This was more about a poor decision than the offense getting punished for a defensive penalty.
February 6th, 2012 at 2:06 PM ^
I would imagine with that little time left you're not really counting the number of Defenders running around downfield
February 6th, 2012 at 2:06 PM ^
It was a smart play by the Giants. The time was more important than the yardage at that point. I'd be surprised if they didn't do it on purpose.
You could even put it on Brady that he should have thrown it away quickly so they didn't lose so much time on the play.
February 6th, 2012 at 2:04 PM ^
The Giants executed this perfectly. Throw 3-5 extra defenders out there and you risk the offense taking notice and spiking the ball, chewing little time and giving them 5 free yards and the down back.
FYI Smart Football did a piece on this last year. For those of you who may question whether this was "intentional" or not, Defenses actually have this in their playbook: http://smartfootball.com/defense/buddy-ryans-polish-goalline-tactic
I hope the NFL takes a look at this in the offseason and gives the offense the time back in scnearios after the 2:00 warning.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:02 PM ^
Thes types of schemes make football fun (to me at least.)
February 6th, 2012 at 1:54 PM ^
Your reasoning is full of flaws. If you want to coach like Mark Richt, that's fine, but the Giants made the right call. No way you should settle for a 35 yard field goal. As the Ravens can attest, you can miss it, plus other things can go wrong like a fumbled snap (see Tony Romo), or it could be blocked. The Giants played it perfectly and Coughlin made the right calls.
Your second guessing of Coughlin is ludicrous.
And just because Belichek instructs his team to let the Giants score, doesn't mean that NYG takes the touchdown. People have suggested letting them score from the 18. If I'm Ahmad Bradshaw, I run down and take a knee at the 1. In fact, if you have any beef yesterday, it could be that Bradshaw didn't take a knee at the 1. That would be a stronger argument than anything else.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:34 PM ^
But chances are New England could simulate trying a little better from the 18 than they did from close range.
A RB or receiver who gets up to full speed and is bearing down on the goal line probably isn't thinking about stopping when he can score the game winning touch down.
February 6th, 2012 at 2:51 PM ^
would have let NY run right in with about 2 minutes left. I'm not sure why he let NY run those extra plays. Maybe he thought 1 minute and 1 timeout was enough time. But yes, NY should have just taken a knee.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:04 PM ^
Tom Brady with 2+ minutes and 2 timeouts vs hoping an NFL kicker misses a 35 yarder. That's a no brainer
February 6th, 2012 at 12:50 PM ^
February 6th, 2012 at 2:31 PM ^
The first post was so good, I'm still going to give you a +1.
February 6th, 2012 at 12:50 PM ^
Did anyone else think it looked like Bradshaw scored on purpose but wanted to make it look like he tried to stop? Got to pad those stats.
February 6th, 2012 at 12:59 PM ^
No I think it was genuine. I heard him on radio this morning and he said that as Eli was handing him the ball he said "Don't score!". I guess it occured to Eli as soon as the play started, but they weren't thinking about it before that.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:13 PM ^
going on right as he reached the goal line and hesitated for a second. He saw how easy it was and that NE obviously had backed off and realized "Oh shit, maybe I shouldn't be scoring". But, he went in anyway. I can't blame him for that. At that point, NE is still ahead and the Giants could always miss even a short FG.
February 6th, 2012 at 12:55 PM ^
In this article, the author uses Win Probability and finds that the Patriots should've let the Giants score two plays before (at the two minute warning).
February 6th, 2012 at 12:55 PM ^
Anyone who watches a game with me or plays NCAA Football with me will tell you I bring this up whenever a situation like this happens. The problem with letting them score earlier, though, is that Bradshaw would have realized it sooner and taken a knee. There's also the possibility of a turnover or really bad penalty, so you don't want to just hand it to them too soon.
I think they did it when they needed to, it was just bad luck that they had to challenge that catch earlier. Had they had 2 timeouts and completed that first pass to Branch, they would have been golden. Branch had plenty of room to run and get out of bounds, leaving them with 30 or fewer yards to go with at least 40 seconds on the clock and 2 timeouts.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:01 PM ^
I am the same way. I can't tell you how many times I've watched a game and said "Let them score!!" I don't get why more coaches don't do it...
February 6th, 2012 at 1:34 PM ^
Probably cause of backlash. The majority of football fans aren't as into the %'s that the majority of mgoblog users are. Take the Falcons going for it on 4th earlier this year, statistically it's the smart thing to do, but if it goes down everyone will on you're case about playing stupid football
February 6th, 2012 at 1:38 PM ^
That score is the only chance they have to win, but it helps the team scoring to cover. ;-)
February 6th, 2012 at 4:02 PM ^
I don't understand why NE didn't let them score one play earlier. They could have saved a few seconds and (more importantly) a timeout.
February 7th, 2012 at 12:56 PM ^
I think the coaches used the timeout to tell them to let them score. If there was an effective way to get that information to the players without a timeout and without alerting the other team, they probably would have done it.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:41 PM ^
about the problem with doing it from the 18. But why not one play earlier? Why waste a timeout just to let them score from the six instead of the seven?
February 6th, 2012 at 12:56 PM ^
From the beginning of that final Giants drive, New England should've been blitzing the house on every play. That way, they either get the ball back or get scored on but in any event it happens quickly, giving The Pats AMPLE time to run their offense rather than little to no time to do so.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:00 PM ^
the pats blitzed a ton on the last drive.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:06 PM ^
I agree....what is the worst thing that will happen, the Giants will complete a long pass play, like to Manningham? Sacks can be killers. Worst thing that happens, you have Tom Terrific with time on the clock and timeouts.
February 6th, 2012 at 12:59 PM ^
Once the Giants moved inside the 20, the Pats shoud have let them score on the next play. If I remember right, there was around 1:30 left in the game, and NE had two timeouts. That's more than enough time to get down the field and take a couple shots in the endzone.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:09 PM ^
I think out of principle alone you play to win the game (Right Coach Edwards???)... which means not letting them score more points than you with under 1 minute to go. Trust your defense and special teams to do their part. Or at least pray their offense or special teams can't do theirs. Giving away points is embarrassing.
Seeing the Patriots DT celebrate with a fist-pump after the Giants took the lead with 0:56 left in the Super Bowl? Seeing Bradshaw "accidently" fall backwards as if he couldn't stop his momentum? Seeing Mayo (?) running towards Bradshaw in what appeared to be an attempt to hit him into the endzone? It was like bizzaro-world where the teams switched jerseys.
Obviously Bill chose Brady with the ball over trusting his defense, special teams, or the pressure on a long snapper, holder, and kicker as time exprires on a big staged game
I guess the Pats staff never saw Earnest and the Browns' forced fumble with the game on the line in the AFC champtionship. Or the Bills/Giants shanked field goal with the super bowl on the line. Or the Long Snapping chaos of Giants/49ers in the NFC playoffs. Miami-FSU wide right.
Offense, Defense, Special Team. Not just Tom Brady. No matter how dreamy and great he is.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:17 PM ^
You're always choosing among probabilities. You could win or lose the game making any of a number of decisions.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:26 PM ^
there's almost no chance that the Giants FG kicker is going to miss a chip shot to win the game. How many XP are missed all season? not many. it was a good call to let the Giants score. too bad there wasn't more time on the clock and too bad branch and hernandez forgot how to catch at the end of the game. would have been an even better finish to the game.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:44 PM ^
So you're giving yourself about a 1% chance that THIS will be the kick that is missed for some weird reason. And that's League wide. As of midseason, San Francisco hasn't missed since 2003. So there's probably some dude who's missed twice, but another who's never missed.
I'm guessing TD drives with one minute left isn't high, but it's higher than 1%.
http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/08/extra-point-is-almost-alw…
February 6th, 2012 at 9:27 PM ^
To your point, Brady did get the ball in the end zone and it became a free ball after being tipped. It nearly worked. Certainly better than 1% chance. If only there was a little more time.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:32 PM ^
I know people love to talk up it being a full team game, but that defense was one of the worst in the league both this year and historically (at least in terms of pass yardage), and Tynes is one of the better kickers in the league. The defense had its chance to stop the Giants between the 20s and failed; at that point, play the odds that your HOF QB and a deadly 2-minute offense will be able to march down the field against a tired and somewhat-ineffective Giants defense.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:35 PM ^
You're going to argue principle when it comes to winning a championship?
Stop it.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:53 PM ^
I didn't answer the OP's question to win a popularity contest or prove to anyone I can get in line like a sheep.
I just answered the question. I didn't realize it was an MGoTestOfWorthiness.
Neg away for being in the minority
February 6th, 2012 at 2:39 PM ^
But for giving such crappy examples, and being snarky about it-
I guess the Pats staff never saw Earnest and the Browns' forced fumble with the game on the line in the AFC champtionship. Or the Bills/Giants shanked field goal with the super bowl on the line. Or the Long Snapping chaos of Giants/49ers in the NFC playoffs. Miami-FSU wide right. Offense, Defense, Special Team. Not just Tom Brady. No matter how dreamy and great he is.
The Browns were losing and trying to tie. Of course you try and stop them and make them fumble. The Giants could just take a knee. The Bills had a 47 yard FG, not a defacto XP. I don't think any of the FSU field goals were automatic either. It has nothing to do with how dreamy Brady is. It has to do with Brady's small chance of coming back and scoring a TD versus the Giants almost non-existent chance of missing that short of a field goal.
But if you have some like examples to use to bolster your argument, feel free to drop your wisdom on us, but do better than thinking it's because we like Brady better than you. Because, well, duh.
February 6th, 2012 at 2:59 PM ^
Tynes kicking a chip-shot field goal being down 2 points or Brady with the ball with 1 minute and 1 timeout down 4. You have chosen to go with the Tynes field goal in this scenario. Belichick chose to put the ball in the hands of one of the best QBs to ever play the game over hoping for a missed FG. That was the rationale for the decision.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:10 PM ^
February 6th, 2012 at 1:16 PM ^
There was a sequence for the Patriots offense, starting with the Welker drop, where Brady's receivers dropped 3 of 4 passes that hit them right in the hands. Just unbelievable at that stage of the game they would choke like that.
I would have let the giants score once they got inside the 20 before they took the second timeout. That gives Brady and co. a legit chance to win. Also, I wouldn't have challenged the Manningham catch. That was a clear catch on the replay and a waste of a timeout.
Edit: Also, remember earlier in the season Belicheck saw his team lose on a field goal from the 2 when they didn't let Buffalo score.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:28 PM ^
unbelievable poor timing to forget how to catch the football.
February 6th, 2012 at 1:39 PM ^
I think something like that happened in the Cardinals-Ravens game too. The Cards stopped a rush on the 5 instead of letting them score and burned their last T/O. The Ravens centered the ball, killed the clock, then kicked a GW from the PAT line