Does that call warrent?

[costanza2k1]

Re: Does that call warrent?

Merged like discussions...

[papillon]

Re: Does that call warrent?

It's a good call and here's why.

1) If the Steelers don't recover it the onside kick the Packers have a short field and will leave the Steelers plenty of time to win the game (that's what happened).

2) If the Steelers recover the games basically over (If Ike waits this scenario plays out)

3) If the Steelers kick it deep and the Pack runs it to the 30 they will score and milk the clock leaving no time for Ben and the offense.

I like the play and the thinking behind it in retrospect.

Pappy

[NorthCoast]

Re: Does that call warrent?

Count me in the group that agrees with the call (well, at least I don't disagree).

As others have pointed out, it gave Ben a little clock to work with because I had NO DOUBT the defense would have allowed GB to eat clock and possibly score again with no time left.

It was actually a pretty gutsy call and I don't think I could have made that one.

[msp26505]

Re: Does that call warrent?

As much as the notion of it makes me cringe, this call is a little similar to Holmgren's call in SB XXXII.

He let Denver score late to get the ball back into Favre's hands because otherwise he would have run out of time. There was about a 98% chance of them scoring anyway, and being down a field goal with :02 remaining was worse than being down a TD with 1:00 remaining. (I'm going from memory here, so my times are probably wrong.)

Anybody who argues that you "don't make that call at any time" is too stubborn to realize that you MUST play the odds if you want to have a chance to win. It's like pulling the goalie in hockey.

Had they not kicked the onside kick, the final score would have been either 31 or 36 to 30 GB.

[flippy]

Re: Does that call warrent?

That was the exact call I wanted right before it happened. I was surprised it played out just like I hoped it would.

I knew we either had to get the ball or let them score quickly so that Ben was on the field to win it in the end. That was our best chance. And I'm so happy Mike Tomlin played for our best chance of winning this game.

[sd steel]

Re: Onside kick was a brilliant call...

I was going to start this thread myself.

It was a desperate move because Tomlin (along with every person watching) knew that there was ZERO chance that this sieve of a defense would keep the Packers from at least kicking a field goal.

At least this way, the offense got the ball back. Had they kicked deep, the Packers would have had the ball for the rest of the game and kicked the game winner as time expired.

The only problem is that Ike Taylor has an IQ of about 70. If he waits another half second, he recovers it past the 40.

When Cowher (and by Cowher, I mean Bobby April) did it in SB XXX, it was a great call.

The announcers haven't followed the Steelers enough to understand the depth of the problems on the Steeler defense.

The onside kick call won the game because it bought us time.

Great post, and great call by Tomlin. I called it myself, and if Ike doesn't screw up it's pure genius! BTW get rid of T. Carter!

[DukieBoy]

Re: Does that call warrent?


This article is interesting.

[url="http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/12/should-steelers-have-kicked-onside.html"]http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/12 ... nside.html[/url]

[BURGH86STEEL]

Re: Does that call warrent?

I know the logic ... but that's fuzzy logic at best.

"You Play to Win the Game"!

That's not playing to win the game. That's what teams with nothing to lose (desperate) do.

What did the Steelers have to lose at that point? I know they gained 2 minutes on the clock with that decision.

I don't think Tomlin should be fired over one call.

[Oviedo]

Re: Does that call warrent?

Totally smart call. As pointed out, the defense wasn't, yet again, stopping the Green Bay passing game. Less than a yard from being perfectly executed. Let's also not forget that it is just as much a gamble relying on our coverage team not to give up a huge return.

I think the call indicates that Tomlin knows there is something systemically wrong with our pass defense AND our coverage teams. IMO in both cases it is schematic and personnel and that can't be fixed mid season but it will be after the season.

[frankthetank1]

Re: Does that call warrent?

It is because we have TWO GLARING WEAKNESSES (both of which are a product of Polamalu's absence). Gay and Carter are about as inept as you can get.

Carter sucks... Gay Is bad but being his first year starting I can see understand.

Carter on the other hand has ZERO football skills... How do you consistently let
players run by you

carter does suck but at least he can tackle. gay cant even tackle!! how do you consistently let a wr make catch right in front of you? does willie gay play in sneakers? i dont recall seeing a player lose his footing as much as gay does. he looks like me trying to skate

[frankthetank1]

Re: Does that call warrent?

I know the logic ... but that's fuzzy logic at best.

"You Play to Win the Game"!

That's not playing to win the game. That's what teams with nothing to lose (desperate) do.

What did the Steelers have to lose at that point? I know they gained 2 minutes on the clock with that decision.

I don't think Tomlin should be fired over one call.

it was an awful call but fired? that is a little drastic. i recall cowher's steelers kicking an onside kick to start the 2nd half in the 95 sb. yeah it worked but if it didnt its just as bad of a call

[Mister Pittsburgh]

Re: Does that call warrent?

I actually don't mind the call. We sealed their two players so all Ike had to do was let it go one more yard. I think the odds warrent doing it and it was the correct gamble. Tomlin could either gamble and his outcomes could be A) We get the ball with 3 minutes left to wear down the clock more and hopefully score which we had been moving the ball well against them, B) The recover with 3 minutes to go on a short field so if our D holds them at mid field they punt and we get the ball back or if they score they had been tearing us a new one with bigger passing plays so it wouldn't have taken very long so plenty of clock to get something going on offense.

The way we had been playing D in the fourth I understand his logic and don't think at that point it is killer. It did catch them off guard as planned and all Ike had to do was let it go one more yard. I am surprised he caught it.

[stlrz d]

Re: Does that call warrent?

It was a great, gutsy call.

[NorthCoast]

Re: Does that call warrent?

I know the logic ... but that's fuzzy logic at best.

"You Play to Win the Game"!

That's not playing to win the game. That's what teams with nothing to lose (desperate) do.

What did the Steelers have to lose at that point? I know they gained 2 minutes on the clock with that decision.

I don't think Tomlin should be fired over one call.

it was an awful call but fired? that is a little drastic. i recall cowher's steelers kicking an onside kick to start the 2nd half in the 95 sb. yeah it worked but if it didnt its just as bad of a call

Frank and others, I would sure like to hear your explanation on why it was "an awful call". And please do not use the phrase "got to trust your defense" in your answer because we all know that is a misguided judgement based on how they were playing in this game (and a few of the other losses as well).

Waiting for a cogent explanation................

[Mister Pittsburgh]

Re: Does that call warrent?

Basically he set up a defining moment and made a statement to his defense. They didn't 'answer the bell' so to speak. They let the Green Bay offense march right down the field on them.

All Tomlin did was secure that his offense would get the ball to end the game instead of giving Green Bay more distance to cover to eat up more clock. It was the defense that let them score from the shorter distance. They could have stood up and made a play to hold them to 3 and out. They didn't.