Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosTheory
Frank said he debated the call. He went with the odds that the defense, who was stout most of the day, would keep them out of the endzone with a long field. I can't see criticizing that call.
I mean, look at what it came down to... Heinicke basically throws a hail-mary type pass from midfield. Gilmore, one the best CB's ever, still gets himself into great position. But then McLaurin makes a fucking unbelievable play going over the top just to get simultaneous possession, and then finishes the unbelievable play by tearing the ball away from Gilmore. What are the odds?
(by the way, none of that matters if we don't fumble twice in the RZ)
But imagine if we turn the ball over right there at our 34 and they still eat the clock and score. The man would be crucified.
|
For all the times I have criticized Frank for taking reckless chances that have backfired, I do feel a little guilty criticizing him for not going for the sure win. But I agreed with C&O when he said it yesterday before the play and I still do, I would have gone for it! Would he have been second guessed and "crucified" had they failed and Washington scored....of course. But it wasn't like they only needed a FG to win, so even if you fail to make the first down, it's not unreasonable to expect your defense to hold them out of the endzone! I think it was worth the risk!