The 4th and 6 on the Colts' final drive...

[Dudley Smith]

Did anyone else wonder at the time if the Colts should have gone for it in the 4th quarter on their final drive with a "4th and 6" rather than try for the 49 yard field goal to go up 6? I remember thinking at the time that it was the right call by the Colts to kick, and going for it there would undoubtedly have been a very aggressive and uncharacteristic move for Pagano. But, I also remember thinking that at that time if the Colts converted it would have been game over, we wouldn't have to rely on Vinny to hit an almost 50 yarder, and we would not have given the Hawks offense (which the Colts were having trouble containing) the ball back to possibly win the game with a TD at the end. Not to mention the Colts offense had been moving the ball pretty well in the 4th.

 

In retrospect it was the right call, but I wonder if the Hawks had gotten a TD if I would feel differently (or if AV had missed the FG). Granted, it would have been a difficult conversion to go 6 yards....

[Danfish98]

I think when you're playing indoors you've gotta be able to trust your kicker to hit the FG when it's under 50 yards.  Fortunately AV is still money in the clutch and I think it was the right call.  I had very few doubts the defense would stop a TD, I was mainly concerned about OT if AV missed.

[Superman]

If it had been a really short distance to go (like less than 2 yards), then maybe you go for it. But probably not. The field goal doesn't nail down the win, of course, but it does force the other team to score a touchdown, which is a big deal. General rule is whenever the points you can score changes what the other team has to do to tie/win, you want the points.

 

I'm a big advocate of being more aggressive with fourth down decisions, but I think kicking the field goal is absolutely the right decision there. For whatever that's worth...

[jwilli69]

I wasn't upset about not going for it on 4th and 6 rather I wasn't happy with the 3rd down call. I think everyone knew Donald brown was getting that ball. Would have been a great time for a Luck designed run while getting the Oline and Donald running the opposite way. I was nervous that vinny would miss it but I don't think you could go for 6 yards at that point.

[Le Neon]

It was too much distance to cover, especially giving up a short field for a tying field goal.  AV is still money from that range in that situation.  Being up 6 was a better risk/reward than going for the first down, especially against that defense.  And especially now that we can rely on our own defense to keep them out of the endzone.

[Buck Showalter]

I remember thinking that too, but then I thought about how the D was looking better in the fourth & I trusted them to make the stop...

[Gavin]

You take the three points try, dont potentially give Wilson a short field to work with with his mobility and with Lynch in the backfield, If Adam misses the field goal then so be it but you take the points in that situation

[House]

There's a greater chance of them driving and tying the game with a FG than them driving and winning with a TD.

Right call to try and get the points and put it all on the Seattle O.

[TYtheMan13]

I think when you're playing indoors you've gotta be able to trust your kicker to hit the FG when it's under 50 yards.  Fortunately AV is still money in the clutch and I think it was the right call.  I had very few doubts the defense would stop a TD, I was mainly concerned about OT if AV missed.

I know, i was super nervous at the time..they would've gotten great field position if AV missed..and that could've worked against our defense mental wise.

[Ja'Crispy]

Ask Belichick about going for it on 4th down at the end of a game. I know, completely different situation, I just like bringing it up . I think it was the correct decision. You have to trust the most clutch kicker in NFL history to be able to make it. 6 yards is too much. Force Seattle to have to score a TD and trust your defense to stop them. They had been doing a great job keeping Seattle out of the endzone at that point in the game. 

[Valpo2004]

It was too much distance to cover, especially giving up a short field for a tying field goal.  AV is still money from that range in that situation.  Being up 6 was a better risk/reward than going for the first down, especially against that defense.  And especially now that we can rely on our own defense to keep them out of the endzone.

 

I agree, the biggest issue here is field position.  

 

You get another 3 points and force them to start at the 20 and score a TD to win the game.

 

Fail on 4th down conversion at that spot and they are not that many yards from being able to kick their own field goal to tie it up or go for the TD and the win.

 

I didn't see the game because it wasn't on TV in South Bend, and the radio had to stay off because our baby was sleeping, but kicking the FG was the right call based on the situation you where describing.  

 

(I mostly followed the score nervously on the NFL network at the end of the game.)

[crazycolt1]

I think when you're playing indoors you've gotta be able to trust your kicker to hit the FG when it's under 50 yards.  Fortunately AV is still money in the clutch and I think it was the right call.  I had very few doubts the defense would stop a TD, I was mainly concerned about OT if AV missed.

That is exactly what crossed my mind also. AV is a very highly paid FG kicker and you have to trust him within 50 yards. That is why he is paid the big bucks. I think that is why they ran Brown to see if he could get the FG inside the 50 yard range. When he did the decision was made. 

[OffensivelyPC]

I thought about it, but realized how much it would have killed us if we didn't get it.  It would have shifted the momentum, in a bad way.  A missed FG is one thing, but a TO on downs would have been devastating.

[BOTT]

No...it was a no brainer IMO

[Guest TeamLoloJones]

I thought about it, but realized how much it would have killed us if we didn't get it.  It would have shifted the momentum, in a bad way.  A missed FG is one thing, but a TO on downs would have been devastating.

If it was 4th and 1 or 2, I'd go for it...but 4 and 6th you kick it.  Everytime.

[USAFHoosier]

I was yelling at the TV to pass for the first down instead of running it on 3rd down.  The game would have been over with no chance of a game winning drive if they would have converted it.

[Superman]

I was yelling at the TV to pass for the first down instead of running it on 3rd down.  The game would have been over with no chance of a game winning drive if they would have converted it.

 

I kind of wanted us to take a real shot at picking up the first down, but the Seahawks had no timeouts, and an incomplete pass would have stopped the clock on the plus side of the two minute warning. It also would have meant a 52 yard FG attempt. Even if AV made it, we would have given the Seahawks the ball with time to run a play before the two minute warning, then they would have had an artificial timeout, so they could have even tried running a read option, which we weren't defending very well.

 

By running the ball, we ate up the two minute warning, gained a few more yards to shorten the FG attempt, and then gave the Seahawks the ball in a must throw, must score a touchdown situation. With no timeouts, and no two minute warning. To me, it was absolutely the right call to run it, and it was absolutely the right call to kick the FG.

 

And again, I think coaches are generally too conservative in those situations. But I think we handled it right, given the circumstances.

[OffensivelyPC]

If it was 4th and 1 or 2, I'd go for it...but 4 and 6th you kick it.  Everytime.

I don't even know if I'd do that.  Not in this case.  I didn't want to give the ball back to Wilson, and they had been excellent the entire game getting into FG range and Haushcka hasn't missed all season.  Our defense, almost all season long just kicks it into another gear when their backs are against the wall.  They did it against the Raiders in teh final drive, SF, and now SEA (I'd throw in teh Jags, but we all know it wouldn't add much to my argument).  Sometimes they lose, sure.  But I have more faith in them keeping them out of the endzone than I do keeping them out of FG range.  Take the 3 and let the D do what it does best...and they didn't disappoint.  Man I'm still on a high from winning that game.  I feel like drinking for a second day in a row to continue the celebration lol.

[Guest TeamLoloJones]

I don't even know if I'd do that.  Not in this case.  I didn't want to give the ball back to Wilson, and they had been excellent the entire game getting into FG range and Haushcka hasn't missed all season.  Our defense, almost all season long just kicks it into another gear when their backs are against the wall.  They did it against the Raiders in teh final drive, SF, and now SEA (I'd throw in teh Jags, but we all know it wouldn't add much to my argument).  Sometimes they lose, sure.  But I have more faith in them keeping them out of the endzone than I do keeping them out of FG range.  Take the 3 and let the D do what it does best...and they didn't disappoint.  Man I'm still on a high from winning that game.  I feel like drinking for a second day in a row to continue the celebration lol.

You have a good point...especially with Havili out the coaches would have probably still kicked it.  Yeah...after a win like that I'll throw back a few during the MNF game tonight with a big smile on my face...even thought its just the Jets and Dirty Birds.  Who knows, it might be a good game.

[Dudley Smith]

Agree with you guys. I know I would be thinking really hard about the decision had AV missed or if Seattle had come down and gotten a TD to win the game. Had it been a 4th and 1 I would have been pretty disappointed we did not go for it and end it there. On a 4th and 6 I agree it was the right call to kick the field goal.

[Dudley Smith]

Ask Belichick about going for it on 4th down at the end of a game. I know, completely different situation, I just like bringing it up . I think it was the correct decision. You have to trust the most clutch kicker in NFL history to be able to make it. 6 yards is too much. Force Seattle to have to score a TD and trust your defense to stop them. They had been doing a great job keeping Seattle out of the endzone at that point in the game. 

 

Like you said, completely different situation in that the Pats were on like their own 27-28 yard line weren't they? Had they been where the Colts were with a 4th and 2 I honestly would not have blamed them for going for it and actually would have thought it was a good call.

[BPM_Colt]

I say take the points. If it was 4th and 2 or less I may go for it. But I think the right call was made

[lollygagger8]

You take the points. Especially if you don't get it, Wilson could scramble for yards with a short field. No thanks. 

 

 

 

Man, my voice is out, and my ears are still ringing from yesterday's game. Lucas Field was ROCKING!!! 

[ColtsFanMikeC]

Did anyone else wonder at the time if the Colts should have gone for it in the 4th quarter on their final drive with a "4th and 6" rather than try for the 49 yard field goal to go up 6? I remember thinking at the time that it was the right call by the Colts to kick, and going for it there would undoubtedly have been a very aggressive and uncharacteristic move for Pagano. But, I also remember thinking that at that time if the Colts converted it would have been game over, we wouldn't have to rely on Vinny to hit an almost 50 yarder, and we would not have given the Hawks offense (which the Colts were having trouble containing) the ball back to possibly win the game with a TD at the end. Not to mention the Colts offense had been moving the ball pretty well in the 4th.

 

In retrospect it was the right call, but I wonder if the Hawks had gotten a TD if I would feel differently (or if AV had missed the FG). Granted, it would have been a difficult conversion to go 6 yards....

I think the fact we have Pat McAffee kicking off helps this decision.  If we go for it on 4th and 6, and fail, we give them pretty good field possession.  By making the field goal, we are pretty much guaranteed that Boomstick is going to force a touchback on the kickoff and start the next drive at the 20.

 

I'd take 3 points and a drive starting at the 20 any day over the chance of failing on 4th down and giving the ball up around the 35 (or worse if Luck got sacked or something).

[GoColts8818]

I think you kick there.  It's why you have a kicker like Adam on the roster.  He's known for being clutch.  If you can't trust him from inside of 50 in a Dome in that situation then he shouldn't be on the roster.  With that said I know some fans don't trust him but the fans do not equal the teams views. 

 

I know there is a chance Adam could have missed the kick and give the Seahawks good field position but if you go for it and don't get it you are more or less telling your defense you don't trust them and expect them to give up the score anyways and give all the momentum in the world to the Seahawks.  You take your chances with the kicker there. 

 

What would have been more interesting is what they would have done on fourth and short before that had Richardson not gotten the first down running it on third and five.  That was a great run by him and huge because it let them take more time off the clock without either having to go for it or punt it and give the ball back to the Seahawks with the two minute warning only needing a field goal to force OT. 

[dw49]

Did anyone else wonder at the time if the Colts should have gone for it in the 4th quarter on their final drive with a "4th and 6" rather than try for the 49 yard field goal to go up 6? I remember thinking at the time that it was the right call by the Colts to kick, and going for it there would undoubtedly have been a very aggressive and uncharacteristic move for Pagano. But, I also remember thinking that at that time if the Colts converted it would have been game over, we wouldn't have to rely on Vinny to hit an almost 50 yarder, and we would not have given the Hawks offense (which the Colts were having trouble containing) the ball back to possibly win the game with a TD at the end. Not to mention the Colts offense had been moving the ball pretty well in the 4th.

 

In retrospect it was the right call, but I wonder if the Hawks had gotten a TD if I would feel differently (or if AV had missed the FG). Granted, it would have been a difficult conversion to go 6 yards....

 

 

 

I would punt before I would go for it. I think Pagano showed a lot of faith in the D and AV which is good ...I guess. I almost agree with you. What I mean by that is I would have thrown the ball on 2nd and 5. With no TO's , it would have about iced the game if completed.

[swflacoltsfans]

I was afraid of a field goal miss it would have given the seahawks the ball in good field position. it all worked out though.

[Restored]

In terms or situational football, no you do not go for it. The Seahawks would only need a FG to tie with almost a full two minutes to go. Them having no timeouts would play a bigger factors in having to score a TD rather than a field goal as they couldn't afford to just use the middle of the field. Colts made the right call.

[Ja'Crispy]

Like you said, completely different situation in that the Pats were on like their own 27-28 yard line weren't they? Had they been where the Colts were with a 4th and 2 I honestly would not have blamed them for going for it and actually would have thought it was a good call.

Yeah if it was 4th and 2 I wouldn't have argued with going for it. I just think 6 is too much of a risk. Fail and give Wilson good field position. Trust Vinatieri.

[schwamm]

I kind of wanted us to take a real shot at picking up the first down, but the Seahawks had no timeouts, and an incomplete pass would have stopped the clock on the plus side of the two minute warning. It also would have meant a 52 yard FG attempt. Even if AV made it, we would have given the Seahawks the ball with time to run a play before the two minute warning, then they would have had an artificial timeout, so they could have even tried running a read option, which we weren't defending very well.

By running the ball, we ate up the two minute warning, gained a few more yards to shorten the FG attempt, and then gave the Seahawks the ball in a must throw, must score a touchdown situation. With no timeouts, and no two minute warning. To me, it was absolutely the right call to run it, and it was absolutely the right call to kick the FG.

And again, I think coaches are generally too conservative in those situations. But I think we handled it right, given the circumstances.

Thanks Sup. I was going to suggest it was my opinion that this was more about time management than it was about field position... or at least about getting into the best position possible with score, field position, AND TIME.

Going for the first down and failing might have left the Seahawks with the killer combo of better field position, more time, and the option to tie.

[Indygal1218]

I was yelling at the TV to pass for the first down instead of running it on 3rd down.  The game would have been over with no chance of a game winning drive if they would have converted it.

 

I think this was where I was.  I twitched an awful lot about the FG.  All I could think was that we needed to make it a two-score game and that field goal just wasn't going to cut it.  The defense had had so much difficulty containing Wilson...

[Superman]

Thanks Sup. I was going to suggest it was my opinion that this was more about time management than it was about field position... or at least about getting into the best position possible with score, field position, AND TIME.

Going for the first down and failing might have left the Seahawks with the killer combo of better field position, more time, and the option to tie.

 

 

I think this was where I was.  I twitched an awful lot about the FG.  All I could think was that we needed to make it a two-score game and that field goal just wasn't going to cut it.  The defense had had so much difficulty containing Wilson...

 

I might -- MIGHT -- have done something different on 2nd down. I was hoping to see the HB trap play a little more on that last drive. Might have busted it out on 2nd down, rather than 3rd. Might have called a middle screen on 2nd down. But I was thinking about the decision of whether you should keep running it or not, and I settled on the idea of running as much clock and killing the two minute warning. 

 

Also, it allowed the defense to get a little more rest before coming back on the field. 

Some feel that we should put the game in the hands of the quarterback a little bit more right there. I'm not opposed to that, but sometimes you have to play the percentages. And I think running the ball was the right call.

[ColtJ82]

If you throw an incompletion on that 3rd down, you are close to being out of FG range. Our coaching staff went into that 3rd down knowing at that point they were simply trying to get a few yards closer for Adam. DHB picked a bad 2nd down to go back to his Raider days.

 

I struggled with this decision myself. If it was 4th and 1 I would have almost instantly said go for it..........knowing, that the FG was the safe play. I was actually very nervous Adam was kicking it. Part of me hoped that they would send Pat in (which is a completely irrational thought).