Fourth and a LONG one…why?

[slanidrac16]

Why?
A first down does nothing but get you 3 more plays. It guaranteed nothing beyond that.
By failing we basically put the Packers in fg position.
A punt would have forced the Packers to drive 70 yards for a td.
We got them in a 4th down situation. They were going to kick a fg and decided to go for it on 4th and 2. And here’s where you separate the men from the boys. They called a play with some balls.
We called a Qb sneak while they lined up 30 guys on the line. It wasn’t 4th and inches. It was damn near 2 yards. Stupid.

All that being said had we punted and forced them to drive down the field we would have went into prevent and watch them dink and dunk their way anyway.

 

[PJ1]

Yes they gambled and it paid off. We gambled with a play we all knew wouldn’t make it. The difference between winning and losing.

 

[speedy]

It was a stupid decision.

 

[BooksOrangePlanet]

it was more like 4 feet

 

[Dback Jon]

Yes they gambled and it paid off. We gambled with a play we all knew wouldn’t make it. The difference between winning and losing.

I would’ve rather punted, but if we were going to run that fourth down play the play that Gannon called would’ve been the last place I would’ve thought about

 

[FB94]

Didn’t mind the call to go for it, I really thought the play call was horrendous especially after GB called timeout and brought in more D linemen and we STILL called the same play. Hey JG and DP have a little imagination for once

 

[Proximo]

It was a stupid decision.

No it wasn't.

Here is why - 1. they have been rightly criticized for not playing to win at the end of games 4 weeks in a row. Time to try to be bold.
2. There was 4 minutes left - if you punt and they start from the 20 they would be able to run all the time out and never give you a chance to score again. It worked out well - we weren't going to stop them - but we did give ourselves 2 minutes to score. We almost did.

The problem was the play call and execution - not the idea. Their 4th and 2 when they could have tied the game was 5 times as risky, but they pulled it off, because they play to win - not tie.

 

[slanidrac16]

it was more like 4 feet

a long one yard. And we actually lost a yard. Dumb scaredy cat call.

 

[NashDishesDimes]

i dont like conservative calls. Cards were moving the ball well, didnt need to go with some conservative tush push against one of the nfls best run defenses

 

[slanidrac16]

i dont like conservative calls. Cards were moving the ball well, didnt need to go with some conservative tush push against one of the nfls best run defenses

Not to mention we had a 145 lb running back “pushing”.

 

[cardcrazy]

Stupid play call!
Punt the ball…you have a lead!
Failing there practically guaranteed a loss with this team!

 

[Stout]

I like the aggression; I hate the play call.

 

[TRW]

I like the aggression; I hate the play call.

I hate both. Punt the damn ball. The punter could have pinned them inside the 10, which was more likely than making the first with that stupid play call IMO.

But, Cards gonna Cards.

 

[Osbern61]

Just looking at both formations before the snap, I thought it was impossible to even make the line of scrimmage.

 

[Harry]

Didn’t mind the call to go for it, I really thought the play call was horrendous especially after GB called timeout and brought in more D linemen and we STILL called the same play. Hey JG and DP have a little imagination for once

I agree with going for it. However this post is correct as was Chopper’s timely observation it was too long a yard for this call. It was another case of being too conservative. A jet sweep or a pass to McBride made more sense. The latter might have gone a long way. How much do you trust your QB?

 

[Dback Jon]

I agree with going for it. However this post is correct as was Chopper’s timely observation it was too long a yard for this call. It was another case of being too conservative. A jet sweep or a pass to McBride made more sense. The latter might have gone a long way. How much do you trust your QB?

I thought not trusting the quarterback was only an issue for Kyler?


Well, at least according to half the board here

 

[BooksOrangePlanet]

petzing thought it was the right call

petzing thought our ghastly offensive line could push their defensive front four feet back - that's the reality of the situation- it's like he wasn't watching the game - it's like he forgot just how much justin frye sucks

only reasoning i can muster for the call is brissett's mastering of the snap count... but that didn't work out - they weren't listening to brissett they were watching fro at that point

 

[Brian in Mesa]

I thought we should have kicked it and made the Packers go the length of the field. We had just made them go three-and-out the series before and the defense was looking solid. Not getting the first there gave them great field position and reenergized them it seemed.

Or, if you do go for it - once the Packers took their timeout because they had 12 men on the field and they removed Parsons and put an extra big defender in there to stop a sneak, you do play-action or something else to get some yards.

 

[cardncubfan]

Why?
A first down does nothing but get you 3 more plays. It guaranteed nothing beyond that.
By failing we basically put the Packers in fg position.
A punt would have forced the Packers to drive 70 yards for a td.
We got them in a 4th down situation. They were going to kick a fg and decided to go for it on 4th and 2. And here’s where you separate the men from the boys. They called a play with some balls.
We called a Qb sneak while they lined up 30 guys on the line. It wasn’t 4th and inches. It was damn near 2 yards. Stupid.

All that being said had we punted and forced them to drive down the field we would have went into prevent and watch them dink and dunk their way anyway.

The refs suck then. This should have been a penalty...

 

[Stout]

I thought not trusting the quarterback was only an issue for Kyler?


Well, at least according to half the board here

I guess you're aiming for stanhood.

 

[Dback Jon]

I guess you're aiming for stanhood.

Nope - recognize there are issues with Kyler, but Brissett is a career backup for a reason. As long as we have the current coaching staff, it doesn't matter.

I do like pointing out the hypocrisy of the Brissett-stans who keep ignoring all the same things that they would criticize Kyler for that keep happening.

 

[BooksOrangePlanet]

I do like pointing out the hypocrisy of the Brissett-stans who keep ignoring all the same things that they would criticize Kyler for that keep happening.

what exactly is that jon? what are all these problems brissett has?

 

[Mulli]

what exactly is that jon? what are all these problems brissett has?

Loser!!

 

[Dback Jon]

what exactly is that jon? what are all these problems brissett has?

4th quarter fading, not targeting MHJ, not leading receivers. Plenty in the game thread.

 

[BooksOrangePlanet]

4th quarter fading, not targeting MHJ, not leading receivers. Plenty in the game thread.

my only knock on brissett is his last 2 drives in the last 2 games being unable to punch it in - could be a lot of things involved but it's ultimately on him - that's the standard we held kyler to - that's the way it should be

but that's where the comparisons end - receivers are eating - if mhj wants to actually catch the ball across the middle he will eat more - until then we'll hit who's open

the not leading receivers take is complete hilarity tho - the yac disputes it - over half of brissett's completions were for first downs and he completed 25 passes - once bam went out brissett did it on his own

i don't know when you crawled up on murray mountain - or should i say hill - but it must be hard to see from up there