He also fucked up by not spiking the ball and keeping the timeout in case of a bad snap.
The Rest of Week 12 Game Thread
- Thread starter DanoooME
- Start date
Funny, but not a bad play in the event of a FG block returned to FG range for Denver.
I thought he ran the clock down to ensure that the kick was the last play of the game. Didn't want to leave time for one play for the Denver offense in case of a miss
If Belichick had Kubiak's choice earlier, would he have sent Ghost out there for the 62-yarder at altitude? Would we have wanted him to?
Trying to think through whether that FG was dumb. Gut reaction was OK in Denver (although maybe better just to go on 4th down) because a tie left Denver a game and a half back with 5 to play, two of which they're underdogs in but maybe I'm overthinking and it's just really dumb
Really when it came down to it OT was just penalty kicks between McManus and Santos.
I think you want to play for the win, given the deficit after a tie is 1.5 with 5 left.
With Ghost's issues this year and the Pats D, I think a punt would have made more sense for the Pats there than the Broncos.
Yeah, that's where I am ... and I suspect the Broncos might wake up tomorrow thinking they should have done the same.
Anything can happen, I guess, but it's hard to see the Pats playing in Denver more than once this year
Well, probably. I think it would have been 1:10 to 1:20 left, right? Have to run one play before the 2:00 warning, then second down takes it to 2:00.
I saw that one other time. Washington against I think AZ. Washington up one with about a minute left and AZ has one time out. AZ throws a pick. The Washington player scores instead of just falling down. AZ scores and gets the two point conversion. But lost in OT.
Reid called, and the Chiefs executed, back-to-back drives where the Chiefs needed 8 points and 3 points to extend the game in Denver against that D.
Never want to count them out, but Denver is 2 back of Oakland with 5 to play. Tough to see them winning the West, given their 1-3 division record.
Never want to count them out, but Denver is 2 back of Oakland with 5 to play. Tough to see them winning the West, given their 1-3 division record.
AFC North has had some good years over the past decade.
EDIT - Cleveland being the obvious 'but...'
Depends what your kicker tells you. If he tells you a longshot, you probably have to suck it up and either go for a first down or punt. If he tells you it's close to 50/50, Then try for the win and hope your d gets a stop if you miss.
Maufman, responding to your earlier post, I think the pats wanted KC to win because 1) they can lose at Denver and get homefield more often now 2) probably would rather go to Oakland or KC than Denver although its arguable and 3) the Pats are in decent tiebreaker shape with KC (I think they win common games now unless they lose to the Jets at home and Denver because KC lost to steelers and Texans. Chiefs could still lose at Atlanta and have tiebreaker edge but then it's unlikely to matter). Tiebreaker with Oakland is fairly unfavorable (bills, Texans, Broncos are common games and pats lost to bills already and Oakland was ahead in SOV last time I checked)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:2007_AFC_South_standings
The division won 75% of non-division games
Against a gassed defense, the best option was going for it on 4th and 10, I think. Especially since they have AJ Derby
NFC West in 2013 had probably two of the best three teams in the league in SEA and SF plus a pretty good 10-6 AZ and a decent 7-9 STL.
I think 93 was getting ready to make the no good hand sign too.deadspin has the gif
The best part is that you can see three Denver players celebrating the apparent tie, but 93 knows whats up.
It's worth noting that Denver's D had 3 chances to make a stop and win the game at the end(4 if you count the 2 point conversion play at the end of regulation) and couldn't do it.
Whoa wait. What?!?
I turned on the game with 4 or so minutes left and saw the long TD and said fuck it and turned it off.
What happened?!!
I turned on the game with 4 or so minutes left and saw the long TD and said fuck it and turned it off.
What happened?!!
Problem is, KC started in Denver territory. A 3 and out would have still given KC a decent shot at a FG.
Maybe the real mistake was not picking up yards on 2nd and 3rd down while chewing up the clock.
He didn't want to play for the tie by punting, credit to him.
So then which play has a higher success rate, 4th and 10 or 62 yd FG? Gutsy call either way but 62 is 62, I think he should have gone for the 4th. And short a sack in that situation he leaves the Chiefs in worse field position.
So then which play has a higher success rate, 4th and 10 or 62 yd FG? Gutsy call either way but 62 is 62, I think he should have gone for the 4th. And short a sack in that situation he leaves the Chiefs in worse field position.
Yeah but if they run the ball two more times, there would have been like 15-20 seconds left and KC without timeouts. Don't make the FG, NBD since the game still likely ends in a tie.
That's the thing, the odds of either succeeding were so low makes taking the near-sure thing seems pretty nice. Maybe if they picked up a couple yards the FG would have been realistic while keeping the odds of losing low enough to limit the downside.
The sure thing left them a game and a half back with 5 to play and a game and half back from the Raiders on division record and with a road game in KC to decide that head-to-head tiebreaker, so I dont know how much value the sure thing tie has. I dont know how much Kubiak was thinking through that in the two minutes he had to make a decision there in the middle of the 100 other things he had to do, but they certainly seemed to place little value on a tie.. Its a pretty fascinating and unique decision point there IMO, particularly in Denver. Im still not sure what was right although my gut says play for four downs and dont worry about the clock was the right call. I hope someone does a good breakdown in terms of season equity.
Yeah, I'd love to see a breakdown by someone much smarter than myself as I'm having trouble trying to actually calculate the percentages here. I think the kick was dumb, but going for it on 4th would have been a much smarter move than punting would have. The division (and thus bye) is very much in play with a win and very unlikely with a tie. I think this outweighs their current position on the outside of the playoffs given that a. they play KC again and b. even with a tougher schedule, they're more likely to win out than Miami. You'd obviously be in better shape with a tie than a loss, but not so much so that essentially conceding the division would have made sense. Maybe I'm missing a tiebreaker somewhere or am overestimating the chances the Raiders would have holding a 1.5 game lead, but if I were a Broncos fan I would have wanted to give Sanders or Thomas a chance to move the chains.