In two consecutive weeks, fans have been able to witness the glory that is the “killer instinct” — that desire to go out for the win and not settle for tying up the game. Dick Vermeil and Jon Gruden get the thumbs up from me for their willingness to throw caution to the wind, and go for the “W”. More often than not, any team that is behind in a ballgame will opt for the chance to tie the game rather than go for the win. It can’t be seen as a stupid decision, or else it wouldn’t be the popular thought of 99 percent of the coaches in all of sports when placed in such a situation.
It’s often labeled “not smart” to opt for the potentially game-winning (or game-losing) play, rather than playing it safe and knocking home that game-tying field goal or PAT.
But why not?
When each respective football team steps on the field, they are playing to win — not to tie — so shouldn’t all courses of action be directed toward achieving that primary goal?
Let’s take the the aforementioned Vermeil and his Kansas City Chiefs as Example 1. In a Week 9 matchup with the Oakland Raiders, the Chiefs blew an 11-point lead in the 4th quarter, finding themselves down three with 1:45 left on the clock. The Chiefs drove down the field, eventually finding themselves on the Oakland 1-yard-line.
The Chiefs didn’t opt for an easy field goal that would have tied the game. They went for the win. They gave Larry Johnson the ball and said “take this Oakland.” Johnson scored, chaos ensued, and Vermeil cried (an ironic twist seeing as how he once labeled Johnson a baby last season).
How did the Chiefs come out against the Buffalo Bills the very next week? They had more turnovers (4) than points (3), so needless to say they were a bit flat. Nevertheless, Vermeil’s decision easily created one of the most memorable play calls of the season to date.
That is until Gruden and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers were put in the same situation in Week 9. Down seven to the Washington Redskins, the Bucs engineered a touchdown drive that most would assume would lead to a game-tying PAT. However, on the ensuing PAT attempt, the Redskins blocked the kick. Lucky for the Bucs, there was an offsides penalty on the play, putting the ball on the 1.
Gruden held up two fingers, and it wasn’t the peace sign.
The Bucs went for the win, and got it, using a Mike Alstott (glad to hear you’re still alive) charge to send the 2-point dagger into the hearts of Redskin fans everywhere, as the scoreboard high above said it all — 36-35.
These two coaches should be applauded for their willingness to dance with the devil and “shockingly” go for the win. Even if their attempts failed, how can anyone seriously feel bad about going for the win rather than a tie?
Granted, in both situations each team was on the 1, and I understand the large difference 1 yard has from 2 yards.
But football, and maybe all sports, would be way more exciting if fans knew that teams were going to go for the win rather than a tie. If Matt Stover doesn’t come out unless it’s for a meaningless field goal or PAT, I won’t cry, I promise.
So I’m hoping that the play calls of Vermeil and Gruden are trend-setters and not just chic picks like the Arizona Cardinals were to win the NFC West.
And if not, I guess I’ll just have to settle for an overtime system that doesn’t even give both teams a chance on offense.
But I’ll save the overtime debate for another day.
2 replies on “Going For The Win”
comment Good article. But, the only thing I could think of, is what if the two teams (or even one) had lost as a result of the gutsy calls. Would you have written the same article? Not saying you are quick to glorify them, just wondering if you would have thought they were still gutsy and brave for making those calls if they had turned out a loss.
in reply you make a good point, but i still defend going for the win when you face an overtime system where you may not even get the ball back…my opinions would likely differ if the NFL OT system was similar to the NCAA’s