PDA

View Full Version : NFl Network analysts about Steelers/Ratbirds game yesterday


steelerohio
10-04-2010, 08:05 PM
So I was watching the recap before I went in to work and the NFL Network guys were analyzing the run play before the punt out of our own endzone... Basically, they were saying the Steelers should have taken a safety (bring the score to 14-12 Steelers still leading) then punt it from the 20 yard line and depend on the D to hold.

I think that would be crazy but doable however, there's still the matter of keeping Ravens offense from being able to kick a field goal. Myself, I wouldn't think of it and even if I did come across the idea, I wouldn't do it. Mainly because it's too much of a gamble in a game as hard fought as yesterday's was...

Any thoughts?

zulater
10-04-2010, 08:05 PM
That would have been retarded.

SteelCityMom
10-04-2010, 08:08 PM
I guess it might have worked, but then you run the risk of them just needing to run down the clock and get in FG range to win the game. I can see the upside to it, but I don't think it's something you'll ever see a team do intentionally.

MasterOfPuppets
10-04-2010, 08:27 PM
well apparently it wouldn't have been anymore risky than calling three predictable run plays and punting...:noidea:

lionslicer
10-04-2010, 08:27 PM
Teams actually do this, no matter how much any one thinks its retarded, instead of the ravens starting on the 40 they would have started around their 40 or 35

zulater
10-04-2010, 08:32 PM
Teams actually do this, no matter how much any one thinks its retarded, instead of the ravens starting on the 40 they would have started around their 40 or 35

Yeah if you're lead is more than 5 points it makes sense, but with a 4 point lead you lose on a field goal. It would be beyond stupid to do that with a 4 point lead and that much time on the clock.

steelax04
10-04-2010, 08:35 PM
The way Sep was booming the punts... might not have been a bad idea... free kick from the 20 with a good 50 yard kick puts them back on their own 30-40 yard line.

dcsteel5804
10-04-2010, 08:44 PM
That would have been retarded.

I know it sounds very risky, but I was actually thinking that during the game. In hind sight, we lost the game anyways, so at least taking the safety lets you get a kickoff and potentially make the ravens drive the length of the field (or at least to around the 30). Given the circumstances, it seems to me that it would have been a better option

zulater
10-04-2010, 08:46 PM
The way Sep was booming the punts... might not have been a bad idea... free kick from the 20 with a good 50 yard kick puts them back on their own 30-40 yard line.

Without the stupid penalty to Slyvester they would have started out at our 49. So for 20 yards you let them beat you with a field goal instead of forcing them to have to score the TD?

SH-Rock
10-04-2010, 08:48 PM
I was thinking the same, but what's done is done

LVSteelersfan
10-04-2010, 08:48 PM
They would have needed about the same yardage to kick a winning field goal as they had for the winning TD. I don't personally think it would have been a good idea. They should have tried a safe pass play or screen to try to get a first down to win the game. That is where the biggest mistake was made. We have great possession receivers in Ward and Miller. I know that it could turn into a pick 6 but that would have been my choice. But if we got Batch sacked in the end zone it is still the same thing as if we did it on purpose. Stupid coaching. We still had a chance in that game if we had a QB who could throw worth crap in crunch time to get to field goal range. Why the stupid punt returner came out of that end zone to make our field position even worse is beyond me. No time goes off the clock if he just kneels down.

zulater
10-04-2010, 08:49 PM
I know it sounds very risky, but I was actually thinking that during the game. In hind sight, we lost the game anyways, so at least taking the safety lets you get a kickoff and potentially make the ravens drive the length of the field (or at least to around the 30). Given the circumstances, it seems to me that it would have been a better option

Tomlin would have been the laughing stock of the league if he had been beat on a field goal there.

colescott1
10-04-2010, 08:58 PM
I asked this during the game to my family / in laws, etc, in the brief amount of time it took to decide what to do, thinking that it would run more time off the clock before the punt. I was about in favor of it until I realized that if you run it on 4th down for a safety, the clock would stop immediately upon taking a knee, etc....so it would lose its benefit. (We gave it back to them with a minute... I was thinking giving it back with 30 seconds or less, with a punt from the 20, might be worth the risk, since Cundiff isn't exactly money, and he had already missed one....

In the end, decided that yeah...forcing them to score a TD was the safest..... so much for thinking..

lionslicer
10-04-2010, 09:52 PM
Yeah if you're lead is more than 5 points it makes sense, but with a 4 point lead you lose on a field goal. It would be beyond stupid to do that with a 4 point lead and that much time on the clock.

If they did it and they lost, its stupid, if they did it and the defense shut them down like it was doing, its a good idea. Ravens would have had to get to the 30 to kick to have any chance, conditions sunday weren't in the favor of the kickers at all.

steelerchad
10-04-2010, 10:08 PM
Teams actually do this, no matter how much any one thinks its retarded, instead of the ravens starting on the 40 they would have started around their 40 or 35

This actually crossed my mind while we still had possession, but I figured they wouldn't and shouldn't do it because of the score. Up 6 points, Maybe. Up 4 points, no way. I would have bet 9 times out of 10 our D would prevent a team from crossing our goaline, whether it's 70 yards or 40 yards with 1 minute left and 0 timeouts.That's why we ran 3 safe plays and punted.

Had we taken a safety, we would have punted a free kick from behind the 20. Teams usually still get pretty good field position after a safety, say the 30 or 35 yard line. You couldn't have figured the 10 yard holding penalty added to the end of the punt. So the Ravens still would have only needed roughly 40 yards to get in position to win with a field goal.

Our defense is usually bend don't break and gives up a lot of field goal chances, but TD's are rare.

I think the coaches made the right call and even though it didn't work the right play calls running it 3 times. With no timeouts for the Ravens you had to take the extra 45 seconds off the clock.

zulater
10-04-2010, 10:30 PM
If they did it and they lost, its stupid, if they did it and the defense shut them down like it was doing, its a good idea. Ravens would have had to get to the 30 to kick to have any chance, conditions sunday weren't in the favor of the kickers at all.

In other words presuming an average kick and return following the safety you would project the Ravens to take possession of the ball at about their own 30. So by your estimation they would have needed to drive to the Steelers 30 to kick the fg, that would be 40 yard right? So a 40 yard drive to potentialy win the game correct.

Instead by punting even with the bone headed penalty the Ravense took possession at our 41. So in order to win they needed to drive 41 yards and put the ball in the end zone. You see where this is headed yet?

:coffee:

Curtain_of_Steel
10-05-2010, 08:22 AM
Not if they were going to play a prevent defense, lol

I thought it about looking at the end zone, but the penalties hurt us and kept stopping the clock. Thinking run there on 3 plays with the Ravens knowing we would run, probably wasnt going to work.

kirklandrules
10-05-2010, 11:50 AM
This is ridiculous. It's far easier to get into FG range than to punch it across the goalline. As the Ravens came down the field the Steelers defense started to compact. That's when the Ravens called the perfect play against the Steelers blitz ... they went max protection and easily pick up our blitzers. Since the Steelers hadn't called many blitzes in that game, it was a pretty good call. Kudos to the Ravens for making the right play call at the right time.

Taking a safety and allowing a team one last drive to kick the game winning field goal is always a bad coaching move.

spyboots
10-05-2010, 11:52 AM
Just make the first down and the OL not make penalities.

SteelMember
10-05-2010, 02:10 PM
Hmmm. Take a saftey?

Let me thi...NO.

cloppbeast
10-05-2010, 03:04 PM
I think Tomlin made the correct move, but taking the safety wouldn't have been that stupid. Taking a safety would mean Ravens would have only needed a field goal to win, as apposed to a touchdown. But, they would have been kicking in the open end of the stadium, a notoriously hard kick to make. During the game Reed had already missed two in that direction and Cundiff had missed one. If the Steelers could force a 45+ yard field goal, chances are Cundiff would miss. Also, I think you have to consider the likelihood of a blocked punt in the end zone.

btaylor
10-05-2010, 03:13 PM
i heard deon sanders saying that we shouldve given them a safety........hes a joke so wouldnt hold much to it

tmacsteelerfan
10-05-2010, 04:24 PM
If you really think about it, if we would have taken the safety by Supulveda running around in the endzone taking up time then falling before contact, then we'd punt it, and they'd be sitting on about 48 seconds. If we got it to the 30-40 yard line their drive for field goal range would be about equal or longer than their touchdown drive, just getting into billy cundiffs range, not to mention he's kicking at Heinz Field. This also could have resulted in them having to rush the kicking team onto the field. I'm not saying it would of been the right idea but really thinking about it, it makes sense.