Possible to score too soon?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Our best chance to win was to score. Dallas best chance to win at that point was to let us score.

You might want to think that one through.

[channtheman]

You might want to think that one through.

LOL, you're right. With their defense, they have to be thinking "we won't stop them on 4 straight plays."

But that implies we try on 4 straight plays.

I'm still recovering from the comeback win and the emotional ride from season over to still hope! Cut me some slack!

[Harlan Huckleby]

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer on this one.

I say the Packer defense was highly suspect, better take some more time off the clock.

[hoosier]

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer on this one.

I say the Packer defense was highly suspect, better take some more time off the clock.

I think there is clearly a right answer. It begins with the fact that the Packers have been putrid in the red zone this year, and have had problems on short yardage for years. I have a sense of dread every time I see them line up on 3rd and short, and the addition of Lacy and his hard charging ways hasn't eased those fears very much. I was hoping they would slow it down a little in the red zone, but flopping on the ball to kill the clock would have risked a very demoralizing end. Better to score any way you can and give your defense a chance to hold, and they get a boost of confidence out of it as well. If they give up a quick score to Dallas at the end, well, that probably means this team wasn't going to go very far in any case.

[channtheman]

Was just thinking about a game all Badger fans will be familiar with. Early this year against ASU, Wisconsin had a chance with around 17 seconds left to kick a field goal. They took a knee, the refs horribly mismanaged the end of the game, and the Badgers didn't even get a chance to score. The Badgers did everything "right" and got screwed by unforeseen circumstances. In football, anything can happen, and most of the time when the clock ticks to 0 no one cares and the result doesn't change.

[MadScientist]

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer on this one.

I say the Packer defense was highly suspect, better take some more time off the clock.

Ideally they would leave Dallas with less time, but in a situation where it is a touchdown or a loss, you have to try. Trying in a way that would keep the clock running if they didn't score was absolutely the right call. You can't risk a goal line failure no matter how crappy the Dallas defense was playing. If this were a case of a field goal wins, or even a FG ties, TD wins then yes milk the clock.

It didn't look like Dallas let the Packers score, but that would have been a reasonable strategy for them, given their defense did not really seem to be up to the task of a goal line stand.

Of course since the Packers won, it was obviously the right call.

[woodbuck27]

LOL, you're right. With their defense, they have to be thinking "we won't stop them on 4 straight plays."

But that implies we try on 4 straight plays.

I'm still recovering from the comeback win and the emotional ride from season over to still hope! Cut me some slack!

This is the classic circle jerk question in terms of the correct response.

As far as I saw it then I was concerned that we scored too soon; torn because we needed to score.

When you introduce the factor of the stress and excitement we all felt at the time you cut the HC a break on that call.

If any Packer fan felt that game was in the bag after Eddie Lacy's flying TD to put us over them at 37-36. That fan has a lot more faith that this fan. Sadly I cannot purchase faith at the Sunday morning flea market.

My faith is an acquired experience based in probability. Probability based in experience and sound logic.

[MadScientist]

If any Packer fan felt that game was in the bag after Eddie Lacy's flying TD to put us over them at 37-36. That fan has a lot more faith that this fan. Sadly I cannot purchase faith at the Sunday morning flea market.

My faith is an acquired experience based in probability. Probability based in experience and sound logic.

Yes, but then shouldn't you have had enough faith in Romo (especially in December) to fuck up in the end to give you some hope?

[pbmax]

Were the Boys letting them score? The guy Raji blocked didn't look interested in taking on Lacy but it was a near certain, if not completed TD by the time he had his shot.

The D line looked like they were trying to stop it.

[woodbuck27]

Yes, but then shouldn't you have had enough faith in Romo (especially in December) to fuck up in the end to give you some hope?

I'm a Pro Pickem player and have been for the last eight years.

I don't count my CP's until I see the word 'FINAL' over the scoreboard.

[woodbuck27]

Were the Boys letting them score? The guy Raji blocked didn't look interested in taking on Lacy but it was a near certain, if not completed TD by the time he had his shot.

The D line looked like they were trying to stop it.

These fellas have at least some pride. In that situation I'd be shocked if that entire defensive front wasn't dug in to stop any rush for six.

Yea right... " let's just let the Packers score and get the lead so we can get the ball back and win this one late."

No way Hose.

[denverYooper]

Were the Boys letting them score? The guy Raji blocked didn't look interested in taking on Lacy but it was a near certain, if not completed TD by the time he had his shot.

The D line looked like they were trying to stop it.

Quarless got trashed on the play.

[ThunderDan]

I wanted the Pack to score the TD with 0:00 on the clock. If they then failed on the last play it was a horrible call and they should have scored right away.

But trailing by 5 you don't waste time on purpose by trying not to score. Sure I wished there was less time on the clock but if you don't have the lead you can't win. I would have felt even better had we gotten the 2 pointer after the TD.

[QBME]

These fellas have at least some pride. In that situation I'd be shocked if that entire defensive front wasn't dug in to stop any rush for six.

Yea right... " let's just let the Packers score and get the lead so we can get the ball back and win this one late."

No way Hose.

That's exactly what Mike Holmgren did in the 1998 Superbowl. Purposely let the Bronco's score the go ahead touchdown to give the Packers offense as much time as possible to come back and score. IIRC, he screwed up a little and wasted some time, but he did let them score.

[ThunderDan]

These fellas have at least some pride. In that situation I'd be shocked if that entire defensive front wasn't dug in to stop any rush for six.

Yea right... " let's just let the Packers score and get the lead so we can get the ball back and win this one late."

No way Hose.

Mad, I think you need to help Woody out here with the Spanish!