Single WTF play that changed the game

Discussion in 'Texans Talk' started by thegr8fan, Nov 8, 2010.

  1. thegr8fan

    thegr8fan All Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    872
    Likes Received:
    48
    First let me say, I am not angry or upset at the game yesterday. I think we had a chance to win it in the end and we just didn't get there yesterday. Which was much better than the butt whipping handed to us in a basket ending that I actually expected walking into that stadium.

    However. There is one singe, GAME CHANGING, play yesterday that I am still trying to figure out. The very first play of the 4th QTR. We are on the San Diego's 17 yd line. We just made a pass play of 5 yds on a 3rd and 6, so we're a yard short. It is 4th and 1 on their 17 yd line. We are ONLY up 2 pts, the score is 23-21 Houston ahead.

    And we go for it?? :headhurts: And of course turn the ball over on downs. :smiliepalm:

    Why did we not take the 'chipshot' FG?? Puts us up by 5, instead of only 2. Changes the entire game ending as even with the Chargers TD and 2 pt conversion, we still only need a FG at the end of the game to win it. Not tie, but WIN. Why in the name of all Holy Football Gods do we NOT take the pts there???

    But without going into the 'if only this' kinda threads, but taking an actual game play that was completely against all football logic that I know of, we don't take points when the Chargers only have to score a FG to take the lead.

    This is the play that won or lost the entire game. Not the 'hurry up' one that everyone wants to discuss. That one was much later and not even necessary is we play this one correctly.
     
  2. Wolf

    Wolf 100% Texan

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Messages:
    37,900
    Likes Received:
    1,699
    Location:
    Kerrville
    this was my thoughts on it at the time


    from the fire frank bush thread
     
  3. SheTexan

    SheTexan Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    7,142
    Likes Received:
    778
    Location:
    Pasadena, Texas
    I ask this same question yesterday Pete. I simply did not understand WHY we did not go for a FG that would have put us ahead. No one I talked to seemed to have an answer either. Just another Kubiak brain fart I guess.
     
  4. gtexan02

    gtexan02 Working?

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    15,785
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Location:
    Boston
    The fans wanted Kubiak to go for it, and Im guessing he was swayed

    Just a clarification point: If we go up by 5 and then they score a TD and 2 pointer (8 points), that puts them up by 3. A fg in that instance would not win it, but would tie the game
     
  5. thegr8fan

    thegr8fan All Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    872
    Likes Received:
    48
    thanks for the reply Wolf. But there is a huge difference, IMO, in how you play defense when you're up by 5 instead of 2 pts. So wouldn't the FG actually have helped our defense, in that sense. Taking some of the pressure off them and allowing them to defend against a TD, instead of just a FG.

    Everyone seems to be focused on the other 4th and 1 play later in the game. But even that play wasn't necessary if we just take the pts here.

    I mean a 2 pt lead, usually, is not even a 'decision' by a Head Coach, they always take the points.

    Especially with a struggling defense. We need all the points we can get.
     
  6. thegr8fan

    thegr8fan All Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    872
    Likes Received:
    48
    thanks for the correction gtexan02.

    Your correct. But we still take it into OT with a FG. We don't have to score a TD at the end like yesterday.

    really the question is why up by 2 pts, and we don't take the points? That is just not a logical football decision, IMO.
     
  7. DerekLee1

    DerekLee1 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,299
    Likes Received:
    121
    We're the best red zone team in football this year, believe it or not. I like that he had confidence that his offense could get that first down. He was playing for the win and not the tie. You get that first, run more time off the clock and score a TD, the game is almost out of reach for SD. It's something Bellichik would've done, and I was actually happy to see the attempt. Hindsight is 20/20. If they'd made the first and scored, everyone would be talking about how much of a genius call it was.

    I, for one, think football is a 4-down sport, not "3 and kick".
     
  8. awtysst

    awtysst Draft Guru

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    7,611
    Likes Received:
    497
    Disagree. I think Kubiak make the right call here. Up till that point, the Texan defense had done virtually nothing to slow down the Charger offense. They had thrown and run on us with relative ease. Kicking a fg would have given us 3 nice points, but if the opposition is going up and down the field getting tds, you need em too. 3 points would have been nice, but Kubiak needed 7 and in my opinion made the right call.

    Now, the Texan D did actually show up and made a a couple of key stops, but up until then they had not done anything and there was no reason to believe they could.
     


  9. TexCanada

    TexCanada Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,337
    Likes Received:
    157
    Location:
    Calgary, Canada
    We went for it because it is pretty clear that our defense can't prevent a score. We needed to be up by more the 8 points to win that game.
     
  10. thegr8fan

    thegr8fan All Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    872
    Likes Received:
    48
    it is when you play the Texans, just ask KC. They went for it twice on 4th downs and made it in their opening drive against us. :bat:

    As for the best red zone stat, you we're correct, yesterday morning. But I don't think that is true today BECAUSE we were 100% in scoring completion of either a FG or TD all the way up UNTIL the very play that I am pointing out. Up until that play at that time we ALWAYS took the points. Always.

    The play that I am referring to killed the 100% Red Zone eff. we had all the way up till then.

    why change? Why do something different??

    And I will never applaud that call when only up 2 pts. If we're up by 4, perhaps. If we're up by 6 I might buy into your logic. But up by 2 and we don't take the points? Come on. Really?
     
  11. Andre_Johnson

    Andre_Johnson Duck Fallas!

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Good aggressive call at the time, poor play selection, thus poor results.

    With that said, if you take the field goal and put the points on the board, your defense plays differently and momentum is still on our side. Overall, Kubiak takes this kind of risk all the time and I was not surprised.

    I was more upset with the hurry up offense with 5 minutes to go, they could have given the ball to Arian or Ward on a couple of draws and Schaub wouldn't have had to force any throws. The offensive play-calling at the end of games this year has been questionable, it's almost as if Rick Dennison falls in love with the pass too much when running the ball isn't really a bad idea.

    Thoughts?
     
  12. DerekLee1

    DerekLee1 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,299
    Likes Received:
    121
    I think you do it every time as long as you're up by more than 1 point and less than 7 and more than 4 minutes left. You want to go up by 2 scores any chance you can.
     
  13. JB

    JB Old Curmudgeon

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    28,483
    Likes Received:
    813
    Location:
    In Transit

    Ummm, going up by 5 is not going up by 2 scores.
     
  14. awtysst

    awtysst Draft Guru

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    7,611
    Likes Received:
    497
    Safety and a fg?!

    I know, I'm just trying to help him out!
     
  15. JB

    JB Old Curmudgeon

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    28,483
    Likes Received:
    813
    Location:
    In Transit
    :lol:
     
  16. DerekLee1

    DerekLee1 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,299
    Likes Received:
    121
    Mentioned this on another post. That was a really well-rested defense after a long drive by their offense. And they had stuffed our run game the entire 2nd half. By playing a no-huddle (it wasn't really a hurry-up as much as a no-huddle, because they did run some draws and screens), it kept the defense on its hells. And guess what? IT WORKED. AJ catches that ball, we're within a hair of pulling it out.
     
  17. thegr8fan

    thegr8fan All Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    872
    Likes Received:
    48
    Up by 5 changes the pressure on our Defense and also forces San Diego to get a TD, not a FG. Taking that FG there would have given the Texans the momentum, changed the defensive playcalling and allowing us to get a little more aggressive Defensively and also forced SD to score a TD, and not a FG, thus putting the pressure on them to score and changing their playcalling. IMO
     
  18. thegr8fan

    thegr8fan All Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    872
    Likes Received:
    48
    Take the FG on this play and it doesn't matter whether AJ catches that pass or not. We only needed a FG to tie the score. And hopefully take it into OT.
     
  19. TexCanada

    TexCanada Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,337
    Likes Received:
    157
    Location:
    Calgary, Canada
    Um..that play resulted in an interception. We can't kick a FG when the other team has the ball.
     
    Andre_Johnson likes this.
  20. hradhak

    hradhak Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,618
    Likes Received:
    73
    The book Hidden Game of Football has a good table about what to do in that situation. It tells you the win probabibility (based on 10 seasons of game situation) based on the situation (score, yardage, etc) if you go for it rather than kick the field goal.

    It actually recommends going for the first down. I don't disagree with the call and as gtexan pointed out, we would still be down by 3 and would need a FG to tie. I don't think it was a bad call, we just couldn't execute.
     
    thegr8fan likes this.

Share This Page