Taking the safety would've been moronic

[NinerSickness]

I can't believe the posts I'm reading about saying Harbaugh was stupid for not taking the safety. For people who don't have money on the game, why the hell would he risk another play when the game is already in victory formation time?

Also, why would he risk an injury making meaningless plays like the kickoff (and more defense if something weird happened and the Seahawks recovered). Or even if they didn't recover, what if the kicker got it to the 1 yard line? You can't do victory formation then.

It was the right absolutely the right decision. Anyone who says otherwise is simply wrong.

 

[h0ckeysk83r]

Word. People get too stupid And moronic. Screw the dumb ass bandwagon bi polar idiots.

 

[NinerSickness]

I can understand that people are pissed who lost money on the game, but for those who weren't gambling, it's a FACT that Harbaugh made the right decision.

 

[tallglassofwater007]

My friend was talking about how his buddy just lost money on the game, and all I could say was, "stop gambling." Doesn't matter if you agree with the call or not, Harbaugh isn't out there thinking about whats going on in Vegas or if he is covering the spread. The only reason I said to take the points from the safety is because it makes it a two score game, and then you just call fair catch on free kick. After thinking about it though, I do agree with the call. If Ginn muffs the kick, or returns it, there is a much greater chance of injury when the game is already in hand.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Lol, I just read the game thread and I'm laughing at the morons who were fuming at Harbaugh. How does what he did NOT make sense?

Declining gave the us ball at around Seattle's 35 with 43 seconds remaining, and Seattle was out of TOs. Two kneel downs and it's game, why even go for the kick?

Come on people.

 

[MHSL82]

Even though it's fun to call people morons sometimes, I wish Harbaugh had listed injury as a reason for not taking the safety. I think some would then say, "ahhh, ok." Because when he said it would have been an onside kick and Seattle would have a chance to win, people respond that it would have been a two score game. As if you should ever take a 2% chance (2 onside kicks) of losing over 1% (kneeling down). Harbaugh's not interested in winning by nine instead of seven.

Years ago, BYU was up by 4/5 points and went for the score, fumbled a fumble 6. When asked why they went for it, the coach said winning by 11 was better than 4. I might be off on the numbers (it could have been 8 is better than 1 or something like that), but they could have knelt. Then, this year, they got their backup QB injured (when their starter was already injured) by going for the first down when they could have knelt the game over. His season is over and now the starter is back throwing INTs.

 

[NinerSickness]

Even though it's fun to call people morons sometimes, I wish Harbaugh had listed injury as a reason for not taking the safety. I think some would then say, "ahhh, ok." Because when he said it would have been an onside kick and Seattle would have a chance to win, people respond that it would have been a two score game. As if you'd take a 2% chance (2 onside kicks) of losing over 1% (kneeling down).

An on-side kick is a lot bigger risk than 2%, and a kneel down is a lot lower risk than 1%. The kneel down risk is like 0.001% or maybe lower.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Even though it's fun to call people morons sometimes, I wish Harbaugh had listed injury as a reason for not taking the safety. I think some would then say, "ahhh, ok." Because when he said it would have been an onside kick and Seattle would have a chance to win, people respond that it would have been a two score game. As if you'd take a 2% chance (2 onside kicks) of losing over 1% (kneeling down).

There shouldn't be a need to explain anything. Two kneel downs and it's game. Why go through what could be an onside kick and then maybe another defensive series?

 

[MHSL82]

An on-side kick is a lot bigger risk than 2%, and a kneel down is a lot lower risk than 1%. The kneel down risk is like 0.001% or maybe lower.

True, I was being sloppy. I just meant taking a bigger risk over a small risk just to get two more points in a win would be stupid. And it would have been two onside kicks, but even that'd be more than 2%, so my bad.

 

[MHSL82]

There shouldn't be a need to explain anything. Two kneel downs and it's game. Why go through what could be an onside kick and then maybe another defensive series?

You're right, I shouldn't worry about morons calling Harbaugh a moron. Unfortunately, just like there will always be poor people, there will always be morons. It doesn't have any meaning. (No, I am not saying poor people are morons or that it's too bad that they exist - just that it's too bad they're poor.)

 

[clyde_carbon]

You're right, I shouldn't worry about morons calling Harbaugh a moron. Unfortunately, just like there will always be poor people, there will always be morons. It doesn't have any meaning. (No, I am not saying poor people are morons or that it's too bad that they exist - just that it's too bad they're poor.)

I have no idea what you just said but I'll take it.

 

[MHSL82]

I have no idea what you just said but I'll take it.

Sometimes I get to pre-emptive to avoid offending people where I then over-explain. Should have just said "There's always be morons so we shouldn't worry about trying to correct them." Much simpler than my befuddled comment.

 

[Smalls]

Not taking safety was smart move for Harbaugh | ProFootballTalk

 

[CalamityX11]

bad move....

 

[Yadahell]

Since Harbaugh could get the measurement before making the decision, it was the right thing to do. Glad I didn't have any money on the game though.

 

[BINGO]

I can't believe the posts I'm reading about saying Harbaugh was stupid for not taking the safety. For people who don't have money on the game, why the hell would he risk another play when the game is already in victory formation time?

Also, why would he risk an injury making meaningless plays like the kickoff (and more defense if something weird happened and the Seahawks recovered). Or even if they didn't recover, what if the kicker got it to the 1 yard line? You can't do victory formation then.

It was the right absolutely the right decision. Anyone who says otherwise is simply wrong.

Seriously? Do you know how the formation of a punt works after getting a safety. Unless you're worried about injuries in which Harbaugh didn't cite, how on earth is it moronic when you have a 9 point league. They have to punt - do you know what the success rate in covering an onside "punt" is in the NFL? I know the success rate for a regular kickoff alignement is not good. It's even worse when teams are expecting you to do it. Again, other than injuries not sure why you would want to do that. What if we were playing Greg Schiano and the Bucs, and they tried their magical play during a kneel down and got the ball back? What if Pete Carroll wanted to borrow that play from his playbook and utilized it on us. I mean you idiots are using what ifs, well two can play the what ifs game too. What if they recover? What if they got injured? What if they got the ball to the one. Jesus Phucking Christ. You'd have a great chance of winning the mega million lottery than for the Hawks to come out with the victory with a 9 point league.

Advanced NFL Stats: Onside Kicks

 

[SRPnVA]

I don't know how people don't see that harbaugh made the right call. Take the safety, game goes on. Take the turnover on downs, game over.

 

[Dodub]

The thing that bothered me about it is that the play was still in question. They were going to review the spot of the ball, had they over turned it (we had been screwed several times by the refs in that game) then we would have been in trouble. Harbaugh makes a lot of quick decisions without thinking, especially when it comes to plays under review so that worried me a bit. When the call on the field as confirmed I felt much better. I'm happy with the result, I'm never one to complain about a win.

That being said, Harbaugh certainly has his flaws like any other coach.

 

[tallglassofwater007]

The thing that bothered me about it is that the play was still in question. They were going to review the spot of the ball, had they over turned it (we had been screwed several times by the refs in that game) then we would have been in trouble. Harbaugh makes a lot of quick decisions without thinking, especially when it comes to plays under review so that worried me a bit. When the call on the field as confirmed I felt much better. I'm happy with the result, I'm never one to complain about a win.

That being said, Harbaugh certainly has his flaws like any other coach.

Dub, I think though that if the call got overturned he would have taken the penalty. He made the call originally because the ruling on the field was turnover on downs.

 

[EaseUrStorm]

Seriously? Do you know how the formation of a punt works after getting a safety. Unless you're worried about injuries in which Harbaugh didn't cite, how on earth is it moronic when you have a 9 point league. They have to punt - do you know what the success rate in covering an onside "punt" is in the NFL? I know the success rate for a regular kickoff alignement is not good. It's even worse when teams are expecting you to do it. Again, other than injuries not sure why you would want to do that. What if we were playing Greg Schiano and the Bucs, and they tried their magical play during a kneel down and got the ball back? What if Pete Carroll wanted to borrow that play from his playbook and utilized it on us. I mean you idiots are using what ifs, well two can play the what ifs game too. What if they recover? What if they got injured? What if they got the ball to the one. Jesus Phucking Christ. You'd have a great chance of winning the mega million lottery than for the Hawks to come out with the victory with a 9 point league.

Advanced NFL Stats: Onside Kicks

So because Harbaugh didn't cite the injury risk then then its not valid? What you just said doesn't make any sense at all. They would definitely attempt an onside kick and you have to compare that against a kneel down for injury risk. They are not even in the same universe.

An onside place kick could be attempted without a tee. Or the kicker could try a drop kick type play to get the ball bouncing around. We're not going to be able to just fair catch a punt unless they're stupid enough to do it that way. And Seattle was pissed off and looking to take shots even if they couldn't get the ball back.

I was pissed because I lost my spread, but Harbaugh definitely made the right decision.

Another thing is for the success rate of an onside kick after a safety - how many have even been attempted? The Pats tried it last year. As said before the kickers can do a drop kick and put the ball in play bouncing around.

The probability of them getting a fumble back on a victory formation snap and scoring is less than if you put the ball back in their hands for two scores. You also have control in your hands with the kneel down. But the injury risk is far less.

If the game is basically over either way, so why put your players at any unnecessary injury risk?