I understand the decision to not kick the FG. What I do not understand is trying to run out the clock with 2 runs each by Hilliard and Polite, while Ricky stood on the sidelines.

I agree with the call to go for it, I disagree with the choice of play. 3 yards is an awful long way to go, when everyone is expecting you to run the ball to manage the clock. That is precisely the reason why they should have gone with play-action pass.

On fourth down, when it comes to running out the clock, an incomplete pass is no worse than a run that comes up short: in both cases, the clock is stopped due to change of possession.

not kicking is the right call. End the game with a first down

I believe a punt would've been a better call. It runs a little more time off the clock and backs them up a minimum of 10 more yards.

Should have at least used Ricky!

Worked out. I too was looking for Ricky to take an outside pitch for the 1st.

GBOFinFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe a punt would've been a better call. It
> runs a little more time off the clock and backs
> them up a minimum of 10 more yards.

...unless the punt's blocked. Given that the FG unit was messed up due to injuries, I wonder if the punting unit was similarly messed up, which might have made punting more risky.

The no FG was the right call given the OL injuries.

Punting would have been a HORRIBLE choice when you look at the reward/risk.

FG - possible 3 points ending the game/ possible block and the opponent getting the ball in Excellent field position.

Going for it - possible 1st down ending game/ turning over the ball with little time and a long field.

Punt - possible pinning them inside the 10/ no points, no first down, possible block, possible return, high probability of touch back and a net gain of 10 yards.

The safest bet is going for it.

I would agree that the better play in terms of 'getting the 3 yards' would be a play action pass. An incompletion or an INT ( that doesn't get a big return) are acceptable; however, a sack would give them even better field position.

So...Hilliard was a pretty safe play. I would have preferred a counter, a draw, or even a Polite Dive. But they made a smart, safe play, that allowed us to win the game.

RICKY on the sidelines was not the most confortable sight with the game slightly in the balance.

DaytonaDolfan13 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RICKY on the sidelines was not the most
> confortable sight with the game slightly in the
> balance.

No, what was unconfortable was watching them come down within scoring range. My heart was getting a work out.

You need 3 yards.

You don't want to try anything fancy that will lose yards. So, no PA pass, no, swings, pitches, sweeps.

You decide you are running it up the middle. You have injuries along your OL., you've lost Ronnie Brown, your team played 5 days ago, Ricky had 22 yds for 119 yds and 20 carries for 102 yds 5 days ago.

Hilliard was running like a stud. I think it was an understandable and smart decision.

I actually liked that Ricky was on the sidelines for our last offensive series. We are going to need him for the next 6 games, and punishing his body for three straight running plays behind a banged up OL in a game in which both sides had significant casualties is like playing with fire.

Sparano has said they ran because he was afraid of trying a long FG with a FG unit that was going to have guys doing things that they don't practice because of all the injuries.

And he said that Ricky wasn't in there because he got dinged up a little on the series before.

dolfanmark Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> And he said that Ricky wasn't in there because he
> got dinged up a little on the series before.


Mark, thanks for adding the explanation about Ricky...I didn't know until now that's 'what Sparano said about not putting him in.