Delete me

[hurricane]

That's what I meant: rather than having the O try for a 4th and 13, he'd have been better to punt and try to pin the Giants near their own goal-line and trust the D to hold them there for an improved field position on the next possession. A 4th and 13 attempt cost momentum and maybe as much as 30 yards.

Both Ds played better than I expected.

half of the time they do this they kick it in the endzone anyways for a touchback , .. i wanted a fieldgoal ..ne kicker is good

 

[blut wump]

Kickers should get more reward for getting a ball inside the 20 and not dropping it into the endzone. On a punt, unlike a kickoff, all they have to do is get it to cross the sidelines. From the position they were in, a nice high kick would have allowed all of the runners to get in there and have a good chance of an excellent field position.

As I understand it, the kickers' grading system encourages end-zone punts since they are credited for the full-distance of the punt ignoring touchback.

A field-goal, putting points on the board, would be better. That comes down to the coach's call, though, and whether he trusts his O to get 13 yards more than he trusts his kicker to hit a 49-yarder. My vote is still with a productive precision punt.

 

[Raptorex]

One of the most puzzling decisions of the game is around the decision not to kick the FG in such a close game. Of course hindsight is 20/20.

Thanks to everyone here for talking sports rather than being a douchebag like many