Roboturner913
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2012
- 25,853
- 55,526
Are you kidding me? They were past their own 40 with a 4th and 3 with 2:27 to go. If they made the PAT then punting would make sense as even without timeouts you can get into FG range for 55 yard attempt by getting 25-30 yards even with less than a minute left.
Andy Reid Punted with over 4 minutes to go in the KC/GB game earlier in the year. KC never got the ball back and kc had like 4th and 4 near mid field.
You take the shot to keep the game going. Maybe you could say that they should have called a timeout before the play. But going for it was the right decision IMO.
Regardless, whether they punted or went for it their D didn’t get a stop on D. Would still get the ball back with around 20 seconds to go in the game. Plus the final 2 runs the Hawks were careful with the ball.
Nah.
When you punt in that situation, you're putting the other team on a long field and you're telling your defense you trust them to go get the ball back. They come out charged up; maybe they don't get a 3 and out but the odds are much better they can make a stop when they have the offense backed up near their own end zone rather than the other side of midfield.
When you go for it in that situation, with 3 timeouts in hand and the two minute warning, you're telling your defense you don't trust them. And then when you don't make it, you're making them defend a short field. It's a total confidence killer.
And Reid made the right decision. Just because the defense gagged doesn't mean he was wrong.