From: kprashan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (hyderabadi)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Low SAQ play by SF 49ers + Giants!
Date: 22 Dec 92 23:41:42 GMT
Distribution: na

In article <1992Dec22.224045.22447@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>, gidi@Hilbert.Stanford.EDU (Gideon Avrahami) writes:
> 
> But my contention is that Seifert & Shanahan know their offense better
> than you.  They probably think that a pass to Rice is a realtively
> high-percentage, low risk play, which if successful will put the game
> on ice.  And they also (Seifert that is) trust that the probability of
> a short punt plus and a resulting Bucs TD in that period of time is
> not very big.


Lets see what were the options available to Siefert and co.

1) Young kneels down with the ball. No chance for a turnover.
45 secs off the clock. Punt the
ball with 15 secs left on the clock. Even a bad punt puts the ball the
ball in Bucs' half. Bucs get one (maybe, two) plays.       

2) Run Rathman (probably the safest hands among SF RBs). Rest same as above.
Risk: could fumble. But the risk is less than an INT and the clock 
doesn't stop.

3) Pass the ball: A 10 yd completion kills the game. An INT really hurts. An 
incompletion means punting and stops the clock. They chose a fly pattern
which Young overthrew. The play may be low risk, but only if but Young 
doesn't underthrow the ball (resulting in a possible INT). 
Young can afford to err on the overthrow side
[which he did], but that means that the chances of a completion are lowered
considerably (low-percentage play). The critical thing is that he first
has to make sure that the pass isn't intercepted, then try to complete it,
which means that the chances of picking up the 1st down on that type
of play is low. Weigh that against the cost that an incompletion stops the
clock, in my opinion, that was not a good call.


> So the pass play failed.  There's always a chance for failure.  So
> what?  The fact that a play fails doesn't make the play-calling wrong.
> And all I've seen from the Niners tells me that for THAT team, in THAT
> situation, with THAT personnel, the pass is a very good call.

No, I am not critizing the fact that the pass failed. My point was on 
the call itself. If they had completed it, I would have said, "Man. that
was very risky. I wouldn't have tried it." It may not be risky to the SF
coaches, but to me, it was risky. 

> Two years ago, in the NFC title game, SF was running out the clock by
> keeping it on the ground.  And yet LT was able to firce the fumble and
> the Giants won the game.  So, do you call that run a "low SQL" play or
> something?  With your 20-20 hindsight you can call it what you will
> and criticize how much you want, but you'd be wrong.  And the proof is
> that Seifert, Shanahan and Holmgren (who was offensive coordinator two
> years ago) win more often in pressure situations then they lose.

One safe running play against TB would 
totally kill any chance of a TB score (they had no TOs.) I don't remember 
if NY had any TOs left. At that time, that was a call I would 
agree with (I think it was on 1st down). 


> Actually, it's really funny.  30 hours after the Niners game, the Jets
> were trying to sit on a lead and ran the ball three times up the
> middle, just like you and your "high RQS" suggested.  And they also
> lost.  And the net-folk are all over Bruce Coslet's case.  So I just
> wonder, is it the "low QWS" or is it just that Armchair Quarterbacking
> is so easy?


The situations are different. TB needed a TD. All that the Dolphins needed was
a FG (plus Stoyanavich has good range), and they had a minute or so to get it.
That is much more probable that TB needing to score a TD by going >55 yds 
in 15 secs. 

 
> >If you want to get the 1st down by a pass, try a pass play that has a 
> >higher chance of working than a timing pattern like the one they tried. 
> 
> I repeat: Shanahan knows more than you about which plays have a higher
> chance of succeeding.  Do you claim otherwise?
> [...]
> --Gidi		(go new england, buffalo, pittsburgh)


For that one play, Yes. In my opinion, a perfect pass was needed to make
that play work. The bad things that can happen from an imperfect pass 
make that play too risky.



_______________________________________________________
| Prashanth                    |                      |
| U. of California @ San Diego | prash@raman.ucsd.edu |
#######################################################
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro