Defense92
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
- Messages
- 182
- Reaction score
- 24
On our first drive in overtime, the Packers couldn't punch it into the endzone from the one yard line. On fourth down, McCarthy took the safe route and kicked the field goal. Minnesota then drove down to kick a tying field goal that eventually resulted in a tie.
At the time, I was convinced that going for it on 4th down was the better call. Here was my reasoning:
1) A touchdown wins the game
2) Turning the ball over on downs at the one, makes the Vikings have to work out of the endzone
3) Our defense wasn't stopping AP or Gerhardt, so trusting Flynn and the offense seemed to make more sense
In the end, our defense did hold the Vikings out of the endzone but did allow a FG. What would you have done. Take the points when you can in OT or go for the glory?
It's basically a "damned if you do and damned if you don't" decision. If they couldn't get it on the previous downs, it is wise to at least take the three points. If he went for it and they were stuffed, people would be calling for McCarthy's head. He played it safely and relied on the defense for a stop which would have given us the win. Looking back, though, yes, it would have been nice for a TD on fourth down and the sudden death, but hind sight is 20/20.