I don’t understand why anyone would not kick a fg

[pittdan77]

You can be in favor of going for it there instead of kicking the FG, if that’s your opinion fine. But please quit comparing it to PSU. The 2 are completely different situations, starting foremost with the fact one gave you the lead and the other didn’t.

They've had three chances to win games with late touchdowns this year. The only game they've won is the one where they HAD to go for it. Actually, Miami was worse than PSU because if you trust your defense so much, you're confident you'll get the ball back. Pretty good chance you would because Miami isn't going to come out throwing from the 1.

 

[gmandingo]

When Pitt was in the 2 in the fourth.

I was reading twitter and Zeise commented that it was the only decision. I am perplexed. I never heard of this and I’ve been watching football a really long time.

1. Our offense was inept. We just ran and was stopped.
2. We don’t have a te that can catch. Often you go to a Te in this situation
3. WE WERE LOSING in the 4th qtr. by one point.
4. Our defense was playing well, feeling had to be we would stop them. And we did! Three and out and we got the call back.

THis alone proves it was a successful decision. Story over. How can anyone argue it? It literally makes no sense. We did what you would think you should. It worked out and we got the ball back.

I literally can’t understand how anyone can think with our pathetic offense and Miami’s defense that we should go for it and most likely still be down 10-9 hoping for another stop and some miracle that Pickett can drive the ball back down the field for the same FG attempt as this one. It’s completely dumbfounding.

People enjoy hating on Pitt. Happens every week, win or lose. Bank on it. Media wants to rouse the ped st fan base. Granted, we know that they are truly the sensationalist losers. I really think it’s that simple.

 

[PittFamily2]

You can be in favor of going for it there instead of kicking the FG, if that’s your opinion fine. But please quit comparing it to PSU. The 2 are completely different situations, starting foremost with the fact one gave you the lead and the other didn’t.

They were two different situations but the theme and the outcome were the same.

A Poor Plan for 4th and 1 yard to go for a TD to possibly win the PSU game and put the Miami game away.

The theme is lets not lose the game rather than lets win the game!

 

[NCanton Panther]

They've had three chances to win games with late touchdowns this year. The only game they've won is the one where they HAD to go for it. Actually, Miami was worse than PSU because if you trust your defense so much, you're confident you'll get the ball back. Pretty good chance you would because Miami isn't going to come out throwing from the 1.

I’ll agree that he over-trusted his defense but there was obviously more involved in the decision than just that. I haven’t seen anyone else mention it so I must be the only one that didn’t have complete confidence in Kessman to make a likely longer FG later on. Yeah he missed the short one just like that at PSU and yeah he was 3 for 3 so far that day. But his overall resume isn’t one of consistency or reliability. If we would have went for it and not got the TD on 4th down, I could easily have seen us stop them, get the ball back and make 1 maybe 2 1st downs at most leaving a long FG by Kessman. I wouldn’t have been as confident in him making the longer FG compared to the short chip shot that gave us the lead.

Bottom line, I’m fully in the camp that is more upset with the conservative play-calling in the 3 plays leading to the 4th and 1 and the lousy 3 runs up the gut after the defense did their job stopping Miami on their 1st possession after the FG.

 

[pittdan77]

I’ll agree that he over-trusted his defense but there was obviously more involved in the decision than just that. I haven’t seen anyone else mention it so I must be the only one that didn’t have complete confidence in Kessman to make a likely longer FG later on. Yeah he missed the short one just like that at PSU and yeah he was 3 for 3 so far that day. But his overall resume isn’t one of consistency or reliability. If we would have went for it and not got the TD on 4th down, I could easily have seen us stop them, get the ball back and make 1 maybe 2 1st downs at most leaving a long FG by Kessman. I wouldn’t have been as confident in him making the longer FG compared to the short chip shot that gave us the lead.

Bottom line, I’m fully in the camp that is more upset with the conservative play-calling in the 3 plays leading to the 4th and 1 and the lousy 3 runs up the gut after the defense did their job stopping Miami on their 1st possession after the FG.

A bigger back might have gotten into the end zone on that third down play. You're right. No guaranteed kicks with Kessman but that's a different issue. You can't put any players out there and hope they don't fail. You have to have confidence in them executing.

 

[pitt2533]

They've had three chances to win games with late touchdowns this year. The only game they've won is the one where they HAD to go for it. Actually, Miami was worse than PSU because if you trust your defense so much, you're confident you'll get the ball back. Pretty good chance you would because Miami isn't going to come out throwing from the 1.

I don't agree, the Penn St decision was 10 times worse and it is not even comparable. Maybe a 100 times worse. The Penn St decision, even if the FG was good at that point, STILL required you to score another TD to win the game. It was beyond reason to even consider a FG in the Penn St game. It was simply beyond dumb. I will never understand that decision. Won't even begin to try and excuse that horrible call on any level.

The Miami game, the FG actually gave you the lead with a few minutes to play with a defense that was lights out to that point. For that reason I was ok with the decision to get the lead. And the Pitt defense did exactly what it needed to and got a 3 and out after that FG put them ahead.

The offense got the ball back with a few minutes left and the lead. If the offense gets a first down or two that game is over, if the punter doesn't kick a 10 yard punt or whatever garbage it was and Miami starts from their own 20 instead of near the 40 or wherever it was the game is probably over.

I understand the thought of trusting your defense and Miami getting the ball at the 1 if you fail on 4th down. But that trust in the defense is also why I had no problem getting the lead there. I hated the 3 plays leading to 4th and 1 but once it was 4th down I take the lead there with my defense playing like it was up to that point.

 

[President Stache]

I don't agree, the Penn St decision was 10 times worse and it is not even comparable. Maybe a 100 times worse. The Penn St decision, even if the FG was good at that point, STILL required you to score another TD to win the game. It was beyond reason to even consider a FG in the Penn St game. It was simply beyond dumb. I will never understand that decision. Won't even begin to try and excuse that horrible call on any level.

The Miami game, the FG actually gave you the lead with a few minutes to play with a defense that was lights out to that point. For that reason I was ok with the decision to get the lead. And the Pitt defense did exactly what it needed to and got a 3 and out after that FG put them ahead.

The offense got the ball back with a few minutes left and the lead. If the offense gets a first down or two that game is over, if the punter doesn't kick a 10 yard punt or whatever garbage it was and Miami starts from their own 20 instead of near the 40 or wherever it was the game is probably over.

I understand the thought of trusting your defense and Miami getting the ball at the 1 if you fail on 4th down. But that trust in the defense is also why I had no problem getting the lead there. I hated the 3 plays leading to 4th and 1 but once it was 4th down I take the lead there with my defense playing like it was up to that point.

This is exactly correct. Why you wouldn’t want to have the lead in the 4th quarter is mind boggling. What if Miami did a Syracuse and threw a 94 yard lucky td pass?

 

[Franb]

This is exactly correct. Why you wouldn’t want to have the lead in the 4th quarter is mind boggling. What if Miami did a Syracuse and threw a 94 yard lucky td pass?

I'll see your unlikely scenario and raise you this one: what if Miami blocks the field goal attempt and returns it for a touchdown?

One aspect of this scenario that has not been mentioned is that Pitt had 3rd and goal from the 1, which is the point at which this decision should be made. If the decision is to go for a touchdown, there are 2 plays to get the yard. Otherwise there is 1 play for the touchdown, and if it fails, attempt a field goal.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Why you wouldn’t want to have the lead in the 4th quarter is mind boggling.

Of course you want to have the lead in the fourth quarter. But the objective of the game is to be winning at the end, not to be winning with seven minutes left to go in the fourth quarter. In case we didn't know that, we found it out again on Saturday.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

It'd be mathematically interesting to calculate the expected win percentage under both scenarios. I think it's be pretty damn close. Typically the computers say always go for it from the 1 no matter what. But maybe this would fit into the rare scenario where not.

It's not the same thing you are asking, and I think we all agree that ESPN's win percentages are problematic, but they had us with the exact same chance to win the game after we kicked the field goal as we did before we kicked it. In other words, the field goal didn't improve our chance to win at all.

 

[pitt2533]

It's not the same thing you are asking, and I think we all agree that ESPN's win percentages are problematic, but they had us with the exact same chance to win the game after we kicked the field goal as we did before we kicked it. In other words, the field goal didn't improve our chance to win at all.

I don't see how that is possible that the chances to win before and after the FG were the same but I don't really care that much to dig into it.

To me, the biggest issues that people should be complaining about is not the FG decision. It is the garbage conservative calls leading to the 4th and 1 and the garbage conservative calls when the Offense got the ball back AFTER the defense forced a 3 and out after taking the lead.

This loss is much much much more directly related to that conservative play calling on those series than it is on the FG decision. And add to that the punter seems to kick the ball 8 yards every time a big kick is needed.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I don't see how that is possible that the chances to win before and after the FG were the same but I don't really care that much to dig into it.

To me, the biggest issues that people should be complaining about is not the FG decision. It is the garbage conservative calls leading to the 4th and 1 and the garbage conservative calls when the Offense got the ball back AFTER the defense forced a 3 and out after taking the lead.

This loss is much much much more directly related to that conservative play calling on those series than it is on the FG decision. And add to that the punter seems to kick the ball 8 yards every time a big kick is needed.

The chances are about the same because a field goal meant that Miami only needed a field goal of their own to retake the lead. Do we not all get that teams with two point leads half way through the fourth quarter frequently lose the game?

But I also agree that the conservative play calling on the next series was bad too. Both of them are born from the same conservative, play to not lose rather than play to win mentality that our coach has displayed since day one.

 

[pitt2533]

The chances are about the same because a field goal meant that Miami only needed a field goal of their own to retake the lead. Do we not all get that teams with two point leads half way through the fourth quarter frequently lose the game?

But I also agree that the conservative play calling on the next series was bad too. Both of them are born from the same conservative, play to not lose rather than play to win mentality that our coach has displayed since day one.

Right it only put us up 2 but is there no consideration that defense pretty much held Miami in check all game long? I don't think Miami getting a FG was anywhere close to a given after getting the lead. They scored 10 points to that point with 3 of those points coming from starting in FG range already due to the Pickett INT and the other 7 from a TD where they started at the Pitt 17 due to another Picket INT.

Outside of those 2 INTs, they scored 0 points and moved the ball basically not at all before Pitt took that lead.

The defense did exactly what it needed to and got a 3 and out. Then we went into a shell and punted the ball 8 yards giving Miami great field position.

 

[President Stache]

Of course you want to have the lead in the fourth quarter. But the objective of the game is to be winning at the end, not to be winning with seven minutes left to go in the fourth quarter. In case we didn't know that, we found it out again on Saturday.

yeah, but what does that have to do with this? It’s the fault of future decisions that caused that not this play

 

[NTOP]

it would be a bad thing because instead of being up 2 you would be behind by 1

Unless we scored. No way to know if we would have or not. Fire all your ammo.

 

[President Stache]

I'll see your unlikely scenario and raise you this one: what if Miami blocks the field goal attempt and returns it for a touchdown?

One aspect of this scenario that has not been mentioned is that Pitt had 3rd and goal from the 1, which is the point at which this decision should be made. If the decision is to go for a touchdown, there are 2 plays to get the yard. Otherwise there is 1 play for the touchdown, and if it fails, attempt a field goal.

yeah, so? Doesn’t change the fact you kick the fg every time in that scenario. I honestly can’t belief this discussion is happening. You’re down 10-9 midway through the 4th, you’re always gong to kick it. It’s cray to say You may give the other team the chance to grind out 5 or 6 first downs and end the game. It makes my head hurt to know there are people out there arguing this. I literally almost became a non Narduzzi fan after the psu decision. If he did another stupid choice in this game I woulda bolted from my support.

 

[NTOP]

They were two different situations but the theme and the outcome were the same.

A Poor Plan for 4th and 1 yard to go for a TD to possibly win the PSU game and put the Miami game away.

The theme is lets not lose the game rather than lets win the game!

And that is totally unacceptable. Don't wait for the opponent to fail.....go for the win all the time.

 

[Dewey Eye]

I would always take the lead. always.
with the lead, you are now in position to win the game. Period.

If you are down 5 and kick the FG to get it within a FG, I can see the argument to go for it. But when the FG gets you the lead, you kick it. 100% of the time. No question. You always take the lead.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

I would always take the lead. always.
with the lead, you are now in position to win the game. Period.

If you are down 5 and kick the FG to get it within a FG, I can see the argument to go for it. But when the FG gets you the lead, you kick it. 100% of the time. No question. You always take the lead.

well they did and lost so there goes that..

 

[Dewey Eye]

well they did and lost so there goes that..

they would've lost anyway with Miami scoring a TD, correct? Speculation doesn't always work.

Doesn't change the fact that always take the lead if given a chance.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

they would've lost anyway with Miami scoring a TD, correct? Speculation doesn't always work.

Doesn't change the fact that always take the lead if given a chance.

if Narduzzi is presented that opportunity again, and makes the same mistake, he'll remember what you said when he's looking for a new job..

you learn from your past mistakes if you are a good coach. Narduzzi better learn from this one.

 

[Dewey Eye]

if Narduzzi is presented that opportunity again, and makes the same mistake, he'll remember what you said when he's looking for a new job..

you learn from your past mistakes if you are a good coach. Narduzzi better learn from this one.

There is no similarity between the PSU game and this decision at all. We are not discussing "being close and settling for a FG" here. Totally unrelated scenarios.

They could not have taken the lead late against PSU with the FG. I would've went for the TD there to tie the game. That is not the same as having a chance to take a lead late in a game.

You make the decision based on what can either win or prolong the game for your team. When you are just cutting into a deficit is where the odor starts to come in.

 

[H2P 2003]

I was fine with kicking there, but it isn’t cut and dry either way.

what was unacceptable were the three play calls on the next series, and what is even more unacceptable is that I’m this offense is totally void of talent.

franky, it is a boring team right now and one that is not very good. This isn’t the old “I hate pitt basketball style..they need to be more offensive” since basketball was winning a ton. The football team is boring, and mediocre. If you’re going to mediocre I’d rather have an explosive offense than a good defense.

 

[Jakhny]

If we scored a td we still lose 17-16. Miami wouldn’t have gone for 2.

Actually if we score the TD and defensively we were exactly where we were on Miami's TD down we do not attack the QB the way we did. We did that because we needed a sack to make it more difficult for Miami to make the field goal. Counterfactual analysis requires recognition that the factual circumstances would have been different.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

yeah, but what does that have to do with this? It’s the fault of future decisions that caused that not this play

You said "why you wouldn’t want to have the lead in the 4th quarter is mind boggling." And if you think that the objective of the game is to be winning at some point in the fourth quarter there's no arguing that. But if you understand that the objective is to be winning when the fourth quarter is over then it has everything to do with whether or not kicking the field goal was the correct decision.

I mean if I gave you a choice, 12-10 game, 30 seconds left, the offense has the ball at the defense one yard line with all three timeouts left, would you rather be the offense or the defense in that situation? I mean if having the lead in the fourth quarter is what it's all about, surely you'd pick to be winning the game. But if you understand that the point of the game is to be winning when the game is over then you'd clearly and obviously pick the team that is losing the game at that moment, because they have a far better chance to actually be ahead at the end, when it actually matters.