You Make the Play Call

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Like a few others have said, the execution was poor. LaFleur was right, we averaging 6.0 ypc the entire game. However I would have preferred a different play call. A lead blocker or a two back set for an outside run that would have allowed for some deception if you're going to keep it on the ground; or a 5 wide set with Adams and your tallest WRs/TEs(Graham, Lewis, Lazard, MVS). As long as Rodgers throws a nice jump ball/outside shoulder(preferably on an out route or smash) , especially to someone like Lazard at 6'5 I think we get an easy TD.

 

[Pugger]

Another head scratcher in that call was having both A. Jones and Davante not on the field! If you're gonna go for it have 2 of your best offensive weapons out there for heavens sake.

 

[OldSchool101]

And now mine doesn’t make sense, but that’s fairly normal I guess

and I was just about to respond to your response to nothing wondering what on earth
That could’ve started a chain reaction of biblical proportions about absolutely nothing in particular.

On a side note Tom Brady would’ve gotten that on a QB sneak like 8 of 10 times. I guess we don’t want another Mahomey scenario tho.

 

[weeds]

Not for a minute am I second guessing the call to go for it ..

My son said "go for it" at the same time I said "take the points".

I firmly believe that in the NFL, you have to take the almost sure points when you can get them. There really isn't all that much that separated these teams...and with the Pack getting the ball first in the second half, I saw it as a chance to put some distance between the two.

 

[rmontro]

At some point you gotta find out if you can just line it up and get it done.

Well, we found out, didn't we?

Kick the field goal. It puts you up by a touchdown, you had a long drive that's wasted if you come away with no points, and there's no guarantee you score on the first possession after the half. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, as they say.

 

[weeds]

The question that really intrigues me is Rivera's decision to go for two instead of kicking the extra point.

I would have taken the point and then decided on whether to play for the tie or win (or loss) once I got the 2nd TD.

Rivera explained it away as "analytics". Fine but why not just say "We were playing for the immediate win to get get the hell out of there."

 

[sschind]

I would have kicked the FG but I have no problem with MLFs decision to go for it. I think the fact they were getting the 2nd half kickoff played into it. If the Panthers were getting the KO I think they go for the points.

I also have a little different take on it. It's almost like they aready got 3 points (maybe even 7) on the drive after the roughing the passer call at the other end that kept the Panthers from getting the ball in great field position. So they run out the clock and come away with nothing. It not really any different than had they punted and the defense had a great stand. Half is over and they are still up by 4.

Like I said I would have went for the FG but I was fine with the decision and the call.

 

[rmontro]

Like I said I would have went for the FG but I was fine with the decision and the call.

Well, I'm certainly not going to call out the mob with torches, but I would have kicked the field goal. Well, not me, but I would have had Crosby kick it.

 

[Cheese Headed Monster]

I was fine with either. I think by going for it the Packers are saying they are committing to changing their identity. We are not the McCarthy team anymore. You can't change your identity by doing the same stuff of years past. I like the call because it shows guts and acceptance of change. The teams of recent years past had no guts, skill and finesse', but no guts. I like it.

 

[Pugger]

I was fine with either. I think by going for it the Packers are saying they are committing to changing their identity. We are not the McCarthy team anymore. You can't change your identity by doing the same stuff of years past. I like the call because it shows guts and acceptance of change. The teams of recent years past had no guts, skill and finesse', but no guts. I like it.

Yes, no guts no glory. But as I said my only beef was if we don't score we end up with nothing and that is precisely what happened. If there was 7+ seconds left I'm all in for going for it.

 

[Pkrjones]

FG all the time.

Mike McCarthy resurfaces... how's it going, coach?

 

[OldSchool101]

Mike McCarthy resurfaces... how's it going, coach?

He’s probably in hiding somewhere eating some comfort food after seeing MLF starting 8-2!

 

[HardRightEdge]

In my view this a situation where you can overthink it. Sure, a minute left in a game where a FG gives you a two score lead? That's a no brainer FG. This is not that.

It boils down to the emotional factor. Does your gut say you can impose your will on the opponent? All the other stuff just rolls into that one thing. The downside is the momentum shift if you fail, the other guy imposes his will. That momentum shift can be considerable, but in this case it would be blunted by the half time break.

In past seasons, with different running games, even with Lacy who was a mediocre short yardage runner contrary to popular belief (more line of scrimage dancer and second level bull), I'd have been inclined in many cases to kick the FG. This is not that.

And you know if you don't go for it, the other guys see a weakness of will and that in itself shifts the emotional edge. It's one of those risks you have to take if believe you have the horses.

 

[GreenNGold_81]

I think you play to win the game. Go for it there, at that point we had some successful runs. Maybe the decision to run Jamaal there was a little iffy, may have had more success with Aaron Jones. But I didn't have a problem with going for it.

 

[Cheese Headed Monster]

In my view this a situation where you can overthink it. Sure, a minute left in a game where a FG gives you a two score lead? That's a no brainer FG. This is not that.

It boils down to the emotional factor. Does your gut say you can impose your will on the imponent? All the other stuff just rolls into that one thing. The downside is the momentum shift if you fail, the other guy imposes his will. That momentum shift can be considerable, but in this case it would be blunted by the half time break.

In past seasons, with different running games, even with Lacy who was a mediocre short yardage runner contrary to popular belief (more line of scrimage dancer and second level bull), I'd have been inclined in many cases to kick the FG. This is not that.

And you know if you don't go for it, the other guys see a weakness of will and that in itself shifts the emotional edge. It's one of those risks you have to take if you think you believe you have the horses.

EXACTLY. Well said!

 

[Cheese Headed Monster]

I think you play to win the game. Go for it there, at that point we had some successful runs. Maybe the decision to run Jamaal there was a little iffy, may have had more success with Aaron Jones. But I didn't have a problem with going for it.

Yeah i probably bounce that run to the outside with Jones. I don't even mind Vitale getting a touch in that situation.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think you play to win the game. Go for it there, at that point we had some successful runs. Maybe the decision to run Jamaal there was a little iffy, may have had more success with Aaron Jones. But I didn't have a problem with going for it.

We've been watching Williams move piles for going on three years now. I wouldn't second guess the choice without 20/20 hindsight. La Fleur said he might with that hindsight after looking at the tape, but that's more about what to do next time. You cannot know what you didn't know but you might know more now.

 

[GleefulGary]

Ha! It's not like it's Williams fault he got hit the moment he got the ball. Jones likely isn't doing anything in that situation either.

 

[BrokenArrow]

i take the 3. i had no problem with the play they called though, once they decided to go for it, except for 69's execution.

What else was 69 supposed to do? Once he is in his stance he cannot move until the snap. I put the blame far more on 74 than 69. He was in position to make a block but instead he doubled down on the next guy over. Even if that's how the play was drawn up, he should have seen that the 69 was not going to be able to make the block on McCoy. Poor communication on the line caused that play to fail.

 

[GreenNGold_81]

Ha! It's not like it's Williams fault he got hit the moment he got the ball. Jones likely isn't doing anything in that situation either.

Hard to know, but lateral burst and vision are Jones strength. I'd take him 10/10 times at the goal line over Jamaal given the choice.

 

[XPack]

Mike McCarthy resurfaces... how's it going, coach?

NFL sucks. XFL rocks. Vince is my new best buddy!

 

[rmontro]

Three points is better than nothing, which is what we got.

I don't agree with the implications that it is cowardly to take the points. Even if we got the touchdown, that would not have put the game away with another half of football yet to play.

 

[Mondio]

it would not have put the game away, but it makes it 2 possessions with us getting the ball again to go up 3 possessions before they ever get a chance to hike the ball again. We were moving the ball well. it was either the game stays close, or we take a chance to blow it open. turns out the game stayed close. it could have been an 18? point game before Carolina got the ball back had we punched it in and scored to start the half like we did?

 

[Poppa San]

Without reference to any past game or any 20/20 hindsight

Yeah like you knew this would happen

 

[HardRightEdge]

Yeah like you knew this would happen

I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

I agreed with the call, it didn't work, but I'd do the same thing again in that situation. My point is get people thinking about the situation without reference to the outcome. It is simply too easy to like the call when it works and not like it when it doesn't.