4 ms·

No. Because you cost yourself 2 points and you give the ball to them. Essentially you gave them 2 points at the cost of being able to "punt" the ball at the 35.

by swang 13y ago

twoodfin 13y ago
Ah, but sometimes two points is not so bad if the clock is a factor and you're about to turn over possession regardless. Down by one and facing a fourth down against the Broncos from his own one yard line with three minutes to go, Bill Belichick famously took an intentional safety[1]. The field position gain from the free kick was worth the two points, and the Patriots went on to win. [1] http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?id=1653659 http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?id=1653659
- swang 13y ago
  Ah interesting, I have never heard about this game specifically. It seems though he gave up some amount of EV by giving up the 2 points to the Broncos, thus a FG later on would only tie the game instead of winning it. But I assumed this was offset by the risk of having to punt and the Broncos end up getting a FG where then they'd be up by 4 points. I don't know if Belichick was right to do this, but it paid off for him which is why everyone pats him on the back. Contrast this with the 2009 Colts/Pats game where he went for it on 4th and 2 on his own 28 and didn't make it.
  - twoodfin 13y ago
    Exactly. Punt from the 1 and the Broncos will have the opportunity to burn clock and still likely kick a field goal, forcing you into a touchdown-required situation. As it was, the free kick netted even more yards than expected. Going for it on 4th and 2 in the '09 game was the right decision, and few knowledgeable commentators disparaged Belichick for it. Manning was dissecting the Pats defense at that point in the game: He had a much greater chance of scoring a touchdown than the Colts defense had of stopping the conversion. Now the playcall...

No. Because you cost yourself 2 points and you give the ball to them. Essentially you gave them 2 points at the cost of being able to "punt" the ball at the 35.

by swang 13y ago

No. Because you cost yourself 2 points and you give the ball to them. Essentially you gave them 2 points at the cost of being able to "punt" the ball at the 35.

twoodfin 13y ago

Ah, but sometimes two points is not so bad if the clock is a factor and you're about to turn over possession regardless. Down by one and facing a fourth down against the Broncos from his own one yard line with three minutes to go, Bill Belichick famously took an intentional safety[1]. The field position gain from the free kick was worth the two points, and the Patriots went on to win. [1] http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?id=1653659 http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?id=1653659

swang 13y ago
Ah interesting, I have never heard about this game specifically. It seems though he gave up some amount of EV by giving up the 2 points to the Broncos, thus a FG later on would only tie the game instead of winning it. But I assumed this was offset by the risk of having to punt and the Broncos end up getting a FG where then they'd be up by 4 points. I don't know if Belichick was right to do this, but it paid off for him which is why everyone pats him on the back. Contrast this with the 2009 Colts/Pats game where he went for it on 4th and 2 on his own 28 and didn't make it.
- twoodfin 13y ago
  Exactly. Punt from the 1 and the Broncos will have the opportunity to burn clock and still likely kick a field goal, forcing you into a touchdown-required situation. As it was, the free kick netted even more yards than expected. Going for it on 4th and 2 in the '09 game was the right decision, and few knowledgeable commentators disparaged Belichick for it. Manning was dissecting the Pats defense at that point in the game: He had a much greater chance of scoring a touchdown than the Colts defense had of stopping the conversion. Now the playcall...