Posts: 235
Threads: 235
Joined: May 2013
Reputation:
0
Was Zim's decision to to for it on 4th and 2 late in the 4th solely a shot at Bailey? It just seemed so obvious they should kick the FG and go up 27-14. One could argue Zimmer wanted to put the game away by getting a TD, but that wasn't needed. I think he was sending a message to Baily and the special teams that he didn't want them on the field. Zimmer should be trusting all phases of his team this time of year. Here we are in December and Zim is once again playing mind games with his kicker?
I thought going for it at that point was stupid.
It was actually a smart play, IMO. If they convert, the game is over. The Vikings could run even more time off the clock and potentially score a TD to go up 17 points (3 scores instead of two). Or kick a FG a couple plays later and have about a minute left for the Packers to try to make a come back. Extremely unlikely.
However, if you kick the FG, you're still only up 2 scores (13 pts vs 10 pts), but you give the Packers an opportunity for a long return on the ensuing kickoff with a couple minutes to go.
I'd rather take my chances to win the game right there because the "downside" is that you pin them inside their own 10 yd line and they still have to go 90+ yds for a TD and would still need to recover an onside kick and get a game tying FG.
I like the call. People have complained that Zimmer is too conservative, but this was actually a good decision if you're into analytics and showed some killer instinct.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
It was actually a smart play, IMO. If they convert, the game is over. The Vikings could run even more time off the clock and potentially score a TD to go up 17 points (3 scores instead of two). Or kick a FG a couple plays later and have about a minute left for the Packers to try to make a come back. Extremely unlikely.
However, if you kick the FG, you're still only up 2 scores (13 pts vs 10 pts), but you give the Packers an opportunity for a long return on the ensuing kickoff with a couple minutes to go.
I'd rather take my chances to win the game right there because the "downside" is that you pin them inside their own 10 yd line and they still have to go 90+ yds for a TD and would still need to recover an onside kick and get a game tying FG.
I like the call. People have complained that Zimmer is too conservative, but this was actually a good decision if you're into analytics and showed some killer instinct.
count me in, I was happy that they showed some confidence in the offense and at that point on the field and in the game I thought it was a safe/good call.
Thats how I looked at it wet
Quote: @Wetlander said:
It was actually a smart play, IMO. If they convert, the game is over. The Vikings could run even more time off the clock and potentially score a TD to go up 17 points (3 scores instead of two). Or kick a FG a couple plays later and have about a minute left for the Packers to try to make a come back. Extremely unlikely.
However, if you kick the FG, you're still only up 2 scores (13 pts vs 10 pts), but you give the Packers an opportunity for a long return on the ensuing kickoff with a couple minutes to go.
I'd rather take my chances to win the game right there because the "downside" is that you pin them inside their own 10 yd line and they still have to go 90+ yds for a TD and would still need to recover an onside kick and get a game tying FG.
I like the call. People have complained that Zimmer is too conservative, but this was actually a good decision if you're into analytics and showed some killer instinct.
So you don't think going for it had anything to do with Bailey's earlier misses? I just think being up by 13 at that stage of the game would've essentially put the game away.
I liked the call whether or not it was a shot at Bailey. Personally I think pretty much everyone on the team needed a call out. It was a game of field position and it was a good move, pin them as far back as you can.
It was a good call, not sure about the play call there. A fake field goal would have been nice to see in that spot.
Quote: @HappyViking said:
@ Wetlander said:
It was actually a smart play, IMO. If they convert, the game is over. The Vikings could run even more time off the clock and potentially score a TD to go up 17 points (3 scores instead of two). Or kick a FG a couple plays later and have about a minute left for the Packers to try to make a come back. Extremely unlikely.
However, if you kick the FG, you're still only up 2 scores (13 pts vs 10 pts), but you give the Packers an opportunity for a long return on the ensuing kickoff with a couple minutes to go.
I'd rather take my chances to win the game right there because the "downside" is that you pin them inside their own 10 yd line and they still have to go 90+ yds for a TD and would still need to recover an onside kick and get a game tying FG.
I like the call. People have complained that Zimmer is too conservative, but this was actually a good decision if you're into analytics and showed some killer instinct.
So you don't think going for it had anything to do with Bailey's earlier misses? I just think being up by 13 at that stage of the game would've essentially put the game away.
oh it was a shot at the kicking unit, Zim said so himself at half apparently, told the sideline chick that he was done with field goals or some such shit IIRC.
Quote: @HappyViking said:
So you don't think going for it had anything to do with Bailey's earlier misses? I just think being up by 13 at that stage of the game would've essentially put the game away.
I don't think so... I mean we kicked a 37 FG towards the end of the 3rd quarter. If he wanted to send a message to the kicking unit, that would have been an opportunity to do so without giving the Packers good field position. But we kicked it on 4th and long and Bailey put it through the uprights to go up 17-14.
Looking back at this season, Zimmer has been making more "gutsy" calls using analytics (like going for it on 4th and short around mid-field, going for 2 early in games, etc.) than in years past. This was an opportunity to win the game with little downside if we don't convert.
It is actually better to be up 10 than 13 in that situation... with the amount of time left, Green Bay would have played it differently if they knew they needed 2 TDs to win. They would have went for it on 4th and 1 and if they convert and score, they could win the game with a recovered onside kick and a Rodgers Hail Mary. Playing it this way, we forced them to kick the FG on 4th down and even if they recovered, a TD would only tie it instead of winning it.
Just my two cents.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
It was actually a smart play, IMO. If they convert, the game is over. The Vikings could run even more time off the clock and potentially score a TD to go up 17 points (3 scores instead of two). Or kick a FG a couple plays later and have about a minute left for the Packers to try to make a come back. Extremely unlikely.
However, if you kick the FG, you're still only up 2 scores (13 pts vs 10 pts), but you give the Packers an opportunity for a long return on the ensuing kickoff with a couple minutes to go.
I'd rather take my chances to win the game right there because the "downside" is that you pin them inside their own 10 yd line and they still have to go 90+ yds for a TD and would still need to recover an onside kick and get a game tying FG.
I like the call. People have complained that Zimmer is too conservative, but this was actually a good decision if you're into analytics and showed some killer instinct.
Same here. I was calling for it before they decided to do it. Go for the kill. End the game. Either way, it was still a 2 score game. Didn't really like the play called, but love the decision.
|
