4th & 26

I get 4th and 26. But fail to understand what you mean.

Fake FG was on 4th & 26

I was just on nfl.com. And they showed the fake field goal and mentioning it was 4th and 26. Now I got it

for the lack of skills to edit this next emote...





Thank you.

I hope you enjoyed the pictogram.

I did catch that, right after third down I whined "4th and 26? Still too soon guys... too soon"

What A gutsy call. I imagined if it failed I would have been calling him an idiot, but I have a hard time recalling another fake under those type of cIrcumstNces. This wasnt 4rth and 5 or something, this was all in from the 27 yard line. The real beauty was that they used the Bears strength of special teams and aggressiveness against themselves.

4th and 26 vs the iggles immediately came to mind. Now it has a good feeling vs the bears

quote:

Originally posted by GratefulPack:
What A gutsy call. I imagined if it failed I would have been calling him an idiot.

That's how that stuff works. M3 was an idiot for calling the onside kick in the playoffs when it failed. Payton was a jeenyus in the Super Bowl when it worked. Last night it worked and he's a jeenyus.

One thing to remember is they call these things when they see stuff on tape. I'm sure they saw something and had it in their pocket when the situation arose.

Also, as far as memorable Packer plays (highs and lows), that play in Philly still leaves a burn mark on my sports fan soul and I appreciate it being brought up after a nice win.

And that's why MM doesn't answer to the fans. Fans focus on results, coaches and GM's focus on the thought process.

quote:

Originally posted by 4 Favre:
I did catch that, right after third down I whined "4th and 26? Still too soon guys... too soon"

Philadelphia was yesterday. Favre kinda had an inkling that he could get one yard at the Eagles 35 and went to the sidelines for guidance.......

quote:

And that's why MM doesn't answer to the fans. Fans focus on results, coaches and GM's focus on the thought process.

I think the FG call was a poor coaching decision given the situation.

Given the distance needed for a 1st down, it had a high probability of failure and would have, IMO, done damage to the team's spirit and enthusiasm and game momentum if it did fail. It would have boosted the confidence of a Bears team that was feeling good about holding the Packer offense in check. Also not getting some points there would have hurt the team's chances of winning it what looked at the time to be a tight, low scoring game. Points were too important to take that risk IMO. It was a risk the Packers did not need to take at that point in the game.

They had been practicing that play for 2-3 years (according to MM), and they waited for a certain look from the defense, which they got last night. There must be something positive about this with regards to coaching - teaching/preparing or the decision to run it, does not matter.

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:

MM sucks

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:
They had been practicing that play for 2-3 years (according to MM), and they waited for a certain look from the defense, which they got last night. There must be something positive about this with regards to coaching - teaching/preparing or the decision to run it, does not matter.

No question. Having the play ready to go, having the guys coached up to run it, waiting for the defensive look...excellent coaching.

I just feel 26 yards was too far to count on getting against the Bears ST unit.

A ST's unit that, as they apparently noticed on film, sells out all 11 guys when going for a block. I also think you're dead Rong on the timing of that decision, as IMHO it was brilliant. Even if they don't get it, they don't lose much since the Barfs would have had to move the length of the field for a chance at any points of their own. The fact that they had 26 yards to go was probably the whole point - they'd have been more prepared for a fake if it had been 4th and 3.

Geenyous call with, IMHO, little downside.

Masthay apparently had the ability to call the play off if he didn't like what he saw. The distance is what made success more likely and I'm sure the play of the defense factored into MM's thinking.

MM has been sitting on that play for years and decided to break it out because Lovie tried the fake Hester fair catch / Knox return play that MM had to answer questions on for two weeks last year.

There's always a risk assoiated with running a fake. I agree that MM and Slocum saw what they wanted and dialed it up. I think that at that point MM knew he had a really good defensive game plan and the risk was worth it.

IIRC, GB had 1st and 10 on the 11 and went backwards fast. The Bears D must was feeling great. That must have felt like a kick to the groin.

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:
They had been practicing that play for 2-3 years (according to MM), and they waited for a certain look from the defense, which they got last night. There must be something positive about this with regards to coaching - teaching/preparing or the decision to run it, does not matter.

It really did come at the right time. The execution was excellent.

quote:

Originally posted by JJSD:
Even if they don't get it, they don't lose much since the Barfs would have had to move the length of the field for a chance at any points of their own.

I'll agree with this. By making the fake call MM was correctly showing major confidence in his defense as well as his STs. That confidence no doubt has a heartening effect on those players and that is one of the reasons MM is a great HC.

I agree the Bears were totally surprised by the fake on 4th and 26. But at the same time I don't think you can see a "certain look" that gives you confidence you can gain 26 yards. There are too many things that can happen where your runner could be stopped before gaining 26 yards, whether the opponent is surprised or not. And if you don't gain the full 26 yards, what is the point?

If Crabtree stumbled just a little more over the pulling G and is tackled for a loss, how many would be supporting the playcall as much as they are now?

The look on MM's face with the fist pump was priceless. I don't think they call that play in a tie game under 1 minute, but at that point, that D&D against a team that hadn't shown it could cross the 50 on offense, go for the dagger play.

And yes, this site would have exploded if it had failed.

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:


If Crabtree stumbled just a little more over the pulling G and is tackled for a loss, how many would be supporting the playcall as much as they are now?

Of course, most would be in opposition of the call if it failed. Hindsight is 20/20.

The beauty of it was that the play was executed to perfection and the Bears were not ready and MM knew it.

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:
If Crabtree stumbled just a little more over the pulling G and is tackled for a loss, how many would be supporting the playcall as much as they are now?

If Finley doesn't fumble.
If Jones flattens his route instead of turning up field.
If Rodgers takes a little off the throw to Jones in the EZ.
If the refs called every hold on Webb.

None of those IFs change the quality of the playcalls.

My point was that either it is good playcall or it is not.

The IFs that happen after the snap don't matter.

Posters here are conceding that IF the play failed, they would be opposed to the playcall. That is human nature, but it is also dum.

I think coming on the heels of the 70 yard pass on 3rd and 1 and the onside kick in the SB, it does show that MM can go a little off the reservation, and that is not such a bad thing as it keeps teams honest.

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:

I agree the Bears were totally surprised by the fake on 4th and 26. But at the same time I don't think you can see a "certain look" that gives you confidence you can gain 26 yards. There are too many things that can happen where your runner could be stopped before gaining 26 yards, whether the opponent is surprised or not. And if you don't gain the full 26 yards, what is the point?

If Crabtree stumbled just a little more over the pulling G and is tackled for a loss, how many would be supporting the playcall as much as they are now?

Apparently, that 'certain look' was what we all saw in reality, which is what you seem to be dismissing - a completely wide open field with nothing but the end zone in sight. Simply telling your guys on the sideline that you're going for it is also a confidence builder in several ways.

Oh, and I liked the call the second I saw it being flipped to Crabtree, so yeah, even if it didn't work I'd still have liked the call. Much like I was fine with the onside kick in the playoff game even though it didn't work.

Don't look now, but Slo-dum's ST's have scored twice in two games.

My point is that it was a good call... maybe I have not expressed that clearly.

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:
My point was that either it is good playcall or it is not.



Posters here are conceding that IF the play failed, they would be opposed to the playcall. That is human nature, but it is also dum.

Agree with this. Easy to question after the fact, we've all done it I'm sure.

He either fears his fate too much,
Or his desserts are small,
That dares not put it to the touch
To win or lose it all

Packers ran a fake FG vs the vikes too; long pass from Flynn to Quarless, but it fell incomplete when Andrew fell down.

Successful Onsides kick to start the game vs Patriots
Successful Onsides kick vs the Cardinals in the playoffs

It was a brilliant call at the right moment and it worked like a charm for the exact reasons some called it a poor coaching decision.

That's how you fool people in the NFL, pulling the unexpected and not laying up

Kudos to the players for their sterling execution, including undrafted Don Barclay ( who ? ) leading the way

It's tough to judge..

Part of what makes the play work is that the distance was 26 yards.. Nobody calls for a fake with 26 yards to go for a 1rst down, right? If it's 4th and 3, it's a safer call, but also a more likely call.

It worked, therefore, great call.

McCarthy addresses the fake at the 2:30 mark

He noted they've been working on it for 2-3 years...

quote:

Originally posted by Satori:

including undrafted Don Barclay ( who ? ) leading the way

ROTT

I've got no problem with folks who like the playcall for the confidence boost idea. I'm disliking it less the more I think about that aspect of the playcall. That is good coaching.

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:
None of those IFs change the quality of the playcalls.

My point was that either it is good playcall or it is not.

The IFs that happen after the snap don't matter.

Posters here are conceding that IF the play failed, they would be opposed to the playcall. That is human nature, but it is also dum.

I like the call because there was no evidence it wouldn't work, unlike the 3rd and 1 play call, run up middle . I knew that wouldn't work. There was plenty of evidence that it wouldn't work. Or...The 3rd and 1 bomb last week, that I knew wouldn't work because the 49ers were playing the safeties deep all day.

If you think about it the Packers really needed something to happen at that point in the game.

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:
The IFs that happen after the snap don't matter.

Not true. How bout IF that play is executed perfectly, it is unstoppable!

That is really cool!

Karma has been restored. The ying has just become one with the yang.

It takes balls bigger than brains to ok that option on 4th and 26. Has to be the longest down and distance intentional fake in NFL history, yes? MM put his whole reputation on the line and the upside is he looks like a maniac. If they lose by 1 he takes a mountain of criticism for going 0-2 and is the laughingstock of the league. Not getting that play could easily have been the defining moment of the season.

Either you define the moment, or the moment defines you.

They waited 3 years to execute it in the situation.

They still win if it didn't work.

packers.com has a Q&A with Bart Starr talking about the ICE BOWL, here's an interesting and relevant snippet:


Q. Did you and Coach Lombardi ever talk later about the quarterback sneak call?

A. Just in a light nature, but I can tell you a quick story of how it came about. In preparing for the game, we had noted the Cowboys had developed what we labeled as a submarine technique on defense, meaning their charge by their defensive linemen was so low that you couldn't block them. All you could do was fall on them. That's how low they got out. We recognized that going into the game and seeing it and so forth, and commented on what a great pattern of efficiency had been developed by the Cowboys. It was good, and we saw it on display in short yardage, so what we had developed in preparing for that game was the play we ultimately ran, because as good as they were at that submarine technique, there was one player on the defensive line who couldn't do it. He was too tall; he couldn't get down that low. That's Jethro Pugh. When we saw it, we planned this wedge play. If we could run a wedge play on Jethro Pugh, because of his high charge, we knew we could knock him well back and get whatever yardage, and that was coming true to form because out in the field, two other times in the game in short yardage, we had run that wedge play at Jethro Pugh and it gained a minimum of four yards. We knew the play would work. It became even worse because, if we were getting down late in the game, having that shadow cast by the giant scoreboard in the south, the ground had become as hard as this table top, and it was slick. It was a very difficult situation.


Q. What if you hadn't scored? Have you ever thought about that?


A. No. We felt like we could because of what I was telling you about the wedge play. We knew the play would work.
What we had to do was make sure we could get our footing. We had run the play twice already with Chuck Mercein carrying it. He was slipping and sliding and not getting back to the line of scrimmage well. That's when I called time out and asked our linemen, "Can you get your footing for one more wedge play?" They said yes. I ran to the sideline and said, coach, there's nothing wrong with the play. The problem is the ground is so hard that the fullback can't get his footing, and he's slipping and sliding getting up there. I said I'm standing upright. I can just kind of shuffle my feet and then lunge in. Typically of Coach Lombardi, he said, "Then run it and let's get the hell out of here." That's how he said it to me. I'm laughing going back to the huddle, and I don't want the Cowboys to see me laughing."

.