Definitely bad officiating, but TO ME the game was over when...

[Pinkerton Security]

...we were down 2 scores with 5:30 left and we punted. I dont care that we were backed up in our own end of the field, when we punted that ball I told my brother-in-law: "Thats game over".

Its (obviously) super frustrating to have such a high-caliber defense, and such a mediocre QB/offense. IMO they should have been playing for 4 downs that series.

[kscdogbillsfan1221]

Couldn't agree more. That was a very very dumb move

[Ed]

I said the same thing in the game thread at the time. It didn't make any sense. It was only 4th and 2. Even if they forced a quick 3 and out, you still need two scores and would be forced to go for it on every 4th down. The idea that punting gives you the best chance to win in that situation is absurd. It's these kind of ultra conservative scared stupid decisions that drive me crazy. When you need a lot of points at the end of a game you need to make plays. Not punt. I couldn't care less if Marrone gets fired at this point. He deserves it.

[Mahdi]

This where coaches and the NFL in general has it wrong...

In Marrone's mind, he knows he needs two possessions to have a chance to win the game, it's 4th down inside your 30 so there is risk of course.

You options are:

1) Punt the ball, your D has to win it back and you have to use your TOs --- best case --> you stop them on 3 downs and lose about 1 min in game clock.

---- you score fast and leave yourself with about 1:30 at best --- they had about 1:15 left if I remember correctly after scoring their last TD. Then you have to kick a good onside kick AND get it back. Go down the field again and score in under 1:10 with no TOs.

Problems here are;

1. Time constraints 2. Chance -- hitting a good onside is about getting a great bounce, doesn't always happen AND you have to get that bounce recovered by guys who are chasing the ball rather than having it come to them.

Basically, the risks, chances, percentages are all against you anyway with option 1 which is what Marrone did.

Option 2. You go for it on 4th down

Now for me option 2 makes way more sense. Its 4th and less than 10 yards but at least you have the ball in your hands and you can make calculated decisions to convert and keep the ball.

Of course if you don't convert it's game over with a chip shot FG but the chances of converting that 4th down are higher than everything else you have to go through to end up tied at the end.

There is also a chance that you stop them on the 25 yd line and their new kicker misses.

In the end, I see option two makes more sense for any coach in that situation of being down 2 scores with that amount of time left.

[Ed]

This where coaches and the NFL in general has it wrong...

In Marrone's mind, he knows he needs two possessions to have a chance to win the game, it's 4th down inside your 30 so there is risk of course.

You options are:

1) Punt the ball, your D has to win it back and you have to use your TOs --- best case --> you stop them on 3 downs and lose about 1 min in game clock.

---- you score fast and leave yourself with about 1:30 at best --- they had about 1:15 left if I remember correctly after scoring their last TD. Then you have to kick a good onside kick AND get it back. Go down the field again and score in under 1:10 with no TOs.

Problems here are;

1. Time constraints 2. Chance -- hitting a good onside is about getting a great bounce, doesn't always happen AND you have to get that bounce recovered by guys who are chasing the ball rather than having it come to them.

Basically, the risks, chances, percentages are all against you anyway with option 1 which is what Marrone did.

Option 2. You go for it on 4th down

Now for me option 2 makes way more sense. Its 4th and less than 10 yards but at least you have the ball in your hands and you can make calculated decisions to convert and keep the ball.

Of course if you don't convert it's game over with a chip shot FG but the chances of converting that 4th down are higher than everything else you have to go through to end up tied at the end.

There is also a chance that you stop them on the 25 yd line and their new kicker misses.

In the end, I see option two makes more sense for any coach in that situation of being down 2 scores with that amount of time left.

Exactly. What's harder, converting a 4th and 2, or recovering an onside kick? If they convert and score quickly on that drive just like they did on the following drive, there's a good chance they don't need an onside kick.

[Novacane]

The game was over long before that. You are right though. Should of gone for it.

[The King]

Ortons INT on the 2 was way more an issue than this.

[Ed]

Ortons INT on the 2 was way more an issue than this.
Yeah once Orton started throwing picks we didn't stand much chance. You can't turn the ball over against better teams and win.

[Typ0]

I see so many positive things from this organization under marrone ... but we also keep seeing these game day fire able offenses too. This was one of them. It wasn't quite 4th and 2 on the 32 but really punting away to Peyton Manning was just plain lame and stupid. AND to go for that 4th down in the first half and not this one was even more mystifying. I liked the call to go for the first one ... take a chance when you need to beat this team the way we did. BLAH.

[TacklingDummy]

Definitely bad officiating, but TO ME the game was over when....

...when Watkins fumbled the ball.

[The King]

I don't understand the criticism of Marrone. It's pretty black and white… our offense struggles our defense is dominant. You let your defense try and keep you in the game, there was still time to be had and the d was playing well.

[Mahdi]

I see so many positive things from this organization under marrone ... but we also keep seeing these game day fire able offenses too. This was one of them. It wasn't quite 4th and 2 on the 32 but really punting away to Peyton Manning was just plain lame and stupid. AND to go for that 4th down in the first half and not this one was even more mystifying. I liked the call to go for the first one ... take a chance when you need to beat this team the way we did. BLAH.

Truth is that most if not all coaches in the NFL would punt.

Its a face saving move for coaches that has nothing to do with winning. If you take option 1 you can claim in the media that you did what you had to do and unfortunately we couldn't stop them after punting or we stopped them and scored but couldn't get the onside. If you go for it the media will call you stupid for ending the game right then and there if you don't convert because a short FG makes it a 3 score game.

So you see, in coaching terms the best decision is to go for it on 4th but the decision that saves you in the public eye is to punt. And that is why coaches do that.

Belichick went for it on 4th and 2 against the Colts in the playoffs and got ripped for it.

[Fixxxer]

The red zone pick by Orton was much more important IMO. We score there and it's a different ball game.

[GreedoII]

But he goes for it on 4th and 6th early? pin them back and maybe they don;t score on that drive. Why make it easy for manning and give him half a field rather than make him go 80 or more? Now that's dumb and reckless coaching. He's lost in 4th down decisions man...sheesh.

[ICRockets]

We had to punt there. If we don't make it on 4th down we're giving them the ball back already in FG range where even if we hold them to a 3 and out they still turn it into a 3 score deficit with too little time on the clock.

[Mahdi]

We had to punt there. If we don't make it on 4th down we're giving them the ball back already in FG range where even if we hold them to a 3 and out they still turn it into a 3 score deficit with too little time on the clock.

Just explained all that though...

[imbondz]

basically at the time of that decision, Marrone was banking on stopping them, scoring, then getting an onside kick back with under a minute left.

What is the percentage chance of that, versus needing 2 yards on 4th down. hmmmmmmm

[Ed]

We had to punt there. If we don't make it on 4th down we're giving them the ball back already in FG range where even if we hold them to a 3 and out they still turn it into a 3 score deficit with too little time on the clock.
Sure, if you don't convert you lose the game, but if you don't get the onside kick you lose the game also. With 4th and 2 the odds are always in the offenses favor. With onside kicks the odds are strongly stacked against you.

Going for it on 4th and 2 would have given them a better chance at winning. You should always do what gives you the best chance at winning.

[SabreEleven]

The game was over when Orton started the game.