Dan Campbell defends decision to punt late vs. Cowboys | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Dan Campbell defends decision to punt late vs. Cowboys

DKphin

DKphin

Club Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2008
Messages
14,535
Reaction score
6,353
Location
Pattaya, Thailand
I am no football savant, but even a moron knows we had no chance to win the game after that decision.
Facing a fourth-and-6 at their own 47-yard line, Dan Campbell elected to punt, despite being down by 10 and only 6:37 left in the game. The defense had been struggling in the second half while the offense couldn't move the ball, which led Campbell to making the decision.
"I knew we'd pin them down there and our defense would stop them on three downs and I wouldn't have to use our timeouts," Campbell said via the Sun Sentinel. "And then they'd punt it back to us, we would score, we'd kick it to them, we'd use our three timeouts to stop them, get it back, score a touchdown, win the game."
Unfortunately for the Dolphins, Campbell's plan didn't work. The Cowboys marched down the field, gained four first downs, and burned more than five minutes of clock. Darren McFadden gained more than 40 yards on ground by himself, burying the Dolphins' chances of a comeback.
Click to expand...
read more: http://www.finheaven.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=2
 
Punting in this situation is what you do when you are NOT trying to win... Just lay down and follow the plan.
 
DKphin said:
I am no football savant, but even a moron knows we had no chance to win the game after that decision.
read more: http://www.finheaven.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=2
Click to expand...

wow what fantasy land is in????? not that we would have made a first down when we only got 4 yds on the previous 3 but to think your D was going to stop the Cowboys and go 3 and out and get the ball back and march down the field then hold them for another 3 and out and only use your 3 time outs at this time and then march down the field again all within 6 minutes......SMH sounds like a fairy tale with this team.....
 
People look at this without thinking. IF we had stopped Dallas from getting a first down on THIRD AND FOURTEEN, we would have had the ball back with 4:30 left around the 40-50 yard line. We could have easily scored a TD before the two minute warning from there and kickoff normally, stop Dallas and use our timeouts to get the ball back around our 20-40 yard line with 1:30-2:00 minutes left to go for the tying or winning score. We could have even kicked a FG if the first drive after getting the ball back stalled out. Of course, the defense didn't step up in crunch time.

In the end, the punt and subsequent defensive collapse is all meaningless anyways. So what if we made the 4th and 6 and went on to score a TD? Dallas proved they could just run it down our throats in crunch time and our defense would collapse. So, what difference does it make?
 
:bobdole:

I really begin to doubt him. If he believes that our offense could drive down there and score twice in a row why not go for a 1st down if you are that confident?
As a former TE and TE coach you would figure that he wants the ball on offense and just go for it. H basically told the offense "I don't trust yiou to get a lousy 6 yards with the game on the line".

This is a huge blunder even for a rookie HC.
 
The 4th and short punt in the first half was equally stupid.
 
I mean what he thought would happen is what Miami needed to happen to win. But what happened was the complete opposite. What a terrible excuse to use as the HC. In that case, you could've also said you go for it, get the first down, score, kickoff, stop them, get the ball back, and win on the final drive.

Holy moly.
 
Honestly, who gives a damn at this point? After yesterday, I have completely tuned him out. Like Philbin, what he says from this point on really does not matter. He and the rest of this coaching staff will be history when the season ends, and the big question will be who will be next coach?
 
BuffaloFinfan said:
People look at this without thinking. IF we had stopped Dallas from getting a first down on THIRD AND FOURTEEN, we would have had the ball back with 4:30 left around the 40-50 yard line. We could have easily scored a TD before the two minute warning from there and kickoff normally, stop Dallas and use our timeouts to get the ball back around our 20-40 yard line with 1:30-2:00 minutes left to go for the tying or winning score. We could have even kicked a FG if the first drive after getting the ball back stalled out. Of course, the defense didn't step up in crunch time.

In the end, the punt and subsequent defensive collapse is all meaningless anyways. So what if we made the 4th and 6 and went on to score a TD? Dallas proved they could just run it down our throats in crunch time and our defense would collapse. So, what difference does it make?
Click to expand...

When has Miami ever easily scored a TD? They had excellent field position all day save for the Landry mishap at the goal line.
 
Doesn't matter anymore. He is officially just a place holder. He's just a terrible game day coach.
 
DuderinoN703 said:
When has Miami ever easily scored a TD? They had excellent field position all day save for the Landry mishap at the goal line.
Click to expand...


Well, they did at the end of the first half yesterday and they did at the end of the half last week so you were saying....?
 
idiot...good bye...

bet he defended that let the clock run at the end of the first half too...fire the entire staff

incompetence thy name is the Miami dolphins
 
He is a place holder. He is not HC material and its not his fault. He was thrust into this position due to lack of options but he should just be a TE coach.
 
BuffaloFinfan said:
People look at this without thinking. IF we had stopped Dallas from getting a first down on THIRD AND FOURTEEN, we would have had the ball back with 4:30 left around the 40-50 yard line. We could have easily scored a TD before the two minute warning from there and kickoff normally, stop Dallas and use our timeouts to get the ball back around our 20-40 yard line with 1:30-2:00 minutes left to go for the tying or winning score. We could have even kicked a FG if the first drive after getting the ball back stalled out. Of course, the defense didn't step up in crunch time.

In the end, the punt and subsequent defensive collapse is all meaningless anyways. So what if we made the 4th and 6 and went on to score a TD? Dallas proved they could just run it down our throats in crunch time and our defense would collapse. So, what difference does it make?
Click to expand...

While I understand your thinking......it was the wrong call. I believed it was wrong when he made it and I believe it now.

What you are describing is what "could" have happened. I think that doesn't jive with both the condition of the defense at the time and the mind set of the team.

What also "could have happened"....is that he showed some guts, had faith in his offense (about as iffy as the faith in the defense) and picked up the first down and continued on to score. This would have supported his ongoing comments about toughness, aggressiveness and playing to win.

He chose the weaker mentality in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom