Jump to content

Should Kyle Shanahan have gone for the tie?


patriotsheatyan

Should Kyle Shanahan have gone for the tie with less than two minutes left?  

30 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Kyle Shanahan have gone for the tie with less than two minutes left?

    • Yes
      3
    • No
      15
    • He should have cautiously started the drive, then opened it up if they got a first down
      13


Recommended Posts

When they got the ball with two minutes left in OT, should he have started out with a run or short pass to be safe and ensure Seattle won’t get another meaningful possession? Or gone for a run or short pass on third down to take 40 seconds off?

8-0-1 for them and 7-2-1 puts the Seahawks in a position where it would be incredibly difficult to win the division. 8-1 vs 8-2 with a game in Seattle later? Not such great odds. This might be the difference between a Wild Card and the 1st seed for SF.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the answer is 'try for a conservative win'

a bunch of running plays win or lose would eat the clock to a tie. Maybe they put you in range for a FG; maybe not.

wasting your downs on high risk high reward tosses that only eats 30secs is ill advised.

but maybe people would snicker behind your back because of X, Y, Z

being 2 games ahead on home field advantage is something worth getting, even if it's off a tie.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Ryan_W said:

the answer is 'try for a conservative win'

a bunch of running plays win or lose would eat the clock to a tie. Maybe they put you in range for a FG; maybe not.

wasting your downs on high risk high reward tosses that only eats 30secs is ill advised.

but maybe people would snicker behind your back because of X, Y, Z

being 2 games ahead on home field advantage is something worth getting, even if it's off a tie.

I agree, but only because Jimmy G had been tossing should-be picks all game.  If you trust your QB to make safe throws, I say go for it.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You go for the win - no question. Would it have made sense to use some clock to protect yourself against a GWD going the other way? Yeah, but you go for the win 100%. In a game where your two best receivers are hurt and Seattle is rattling your QB, you have to make smart play calls. 

If Shanahan (or any coach in a similar position) came out and said that they were playing to tie, they’d lose all respect and would go down as spineless - especially against a rival that has a chance at taking the division after said game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he should have played to tie but 3 straight passing plays in hindsight wasn't wise. Either a run or a high percentage screen to get yards and run clock to make sure you have the ball last would have been most ideal. A tie would have helped San Fran much more than Seattle. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LeotheLion said:

I don't think he should have played to tie but 3 straight passing plays in hindsight wasn't wise. Either a run or a high percentage screen to get yards and run clock to make sure you have the ball last would have been most ideal. A tie would have helped San Fran much more than Seattle. 

This is kind of what I said. I think I probably would have run the ball on first down, maybe run a screen or something like that to just eat the clock up a bit, mainly because I think with timeouts, I think you can still move the ball down the field into FG range with about 1:25 left or so. But it's a minor quibble. I don't really have an issue with the decision, I probably just would have altered the playcalls a bit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

Absolutely, you play to the tie imo.  If i'm playing Madden...who cares...but in the real world, with jobs and records on the line, you play the smart ball.

I feel like a team that is 8-0 at the time probably doesn't have too many concerns over job security

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Forge said:

I feel like a team that is 8-0 at the time probably doesn't have too many concerns over job security

That's a gambler's fallacy sort of thing though.  I won the last 8, i'm gonna win this one too!  I'm a roll!!!

You play to the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

That's a gambler's fallacy sort of thing though.  I won the last 8, i'm gonna win this one too!  I'm a roll!!!

You play to the game to win

Added the bolded. 

And no, that's not the same. The weren't gambling a season away on a single drive. If this season goes bad, it's for reasons a lot bigger than this drive. They had an opportunity to win. They had to go 50 yards in slightly less than two minutes lol. The idea of turtling up for a tie is preposterous.

And shanny / Lynch have six year deals with no offset language. They are fine regardless. 

You can debate the calls they made with regards to the plays, but the idea they should have played for a tie in that situation is silly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...