Fourth-down analysis met with skepticism

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Rams Huddle Fourth-down analysis met with skepticism

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #14000
    Avatar photoAgamemnon
    Participant

    http://static.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/garber_greg/1453717.html

    Thursday, October 31, 2002
    Updated: November 1, 1:45 PM ET
    Fourth-down analysis met with skepticism
    By Greg Garber
    ESPN.com

    BERKELEY, Calif. — Wander down Telegraph Avenue, through the bohemian landscape of bistros and shops. Cross onto the eclectic campus of the University of California. Pass through Sather Gate. Make your way past dozens of tables set up by student organizations in their fall recruiting mode. Shuffle through the falling leaves. Eventually you will come upon Evans Hall, a hulking, utterly charmless stack of concrete.

    Up in a fifth floor classroom, David Romer, a Cal-Berkeley professor of economics, writes a series of hieroglyphs on the board — with a Sharpie, which, unlike a certain wide receiver from across the Bay, he did not pull from his khaki sock:

    Ei Di(gt) Vi = Pgt + Bgt Ei Di(gt+1) Vi – egt

    This, in the unimpeachable terms of the Bellman Equation, is the definitive proof that NFL head coaches should go for it more on fourth down. Really, no kidding.

    Bill Belichick
    Bill Belichick is one of several NFL head coaches who has studied David Romer’s work.
    “Teams should be a lot more aggressive on fourth down,” Romer says with the precise air of a scientist. “On average, you’d be better off going for it, essentially, in any short-yardage situation, and then there are some cases even in longer yardage when you’re in that position where neither punting nor a field goal looks very attractive.

    “The usual assumption of profit-maximization implies that in their on-field behavior, teams should act to maximize their probabilities of winning. This isn’t happening.”

    This, of course, is heresy. In the button-down world of the NFL — the last bastion of fascism, according to one enlightened former player — a conservative approach is almost mandatory. Survival of the safest, if you will. Fourth down, the ultimate push-comes-to-shove, all-or-nothing moment in football, is not generally judged to be worth the gamble. Not only are points often at stake — passing on a three-point field goal is sacrilege in Coaching 101 — but there is also the momentous matter of field position, roughly 40 yards worth. Coaches are terminally terrified of risking that stretch of precious real estate.

    But the risk, Romer insists, is almost always worth the potential reward.

    “This is a professor from Cal-Berzerkely?” asked Giants head coach Jim Fassel, in the true tradition of a former Stanford man.

    Fassel turned a sheet with the equation on it sideways, then upside down in a humorous attempt to absorb its subtleties.

    “What does the professor coach?” Fassel asked. “Maybe,” he added, “he needs a few more classes to teach. Too much free time?”

    Steve Mariucci, the 49ers head coach, has considered Romer’s thesis. The difficulty, according to Mariucci, is maintaining a level head when everyone in the stadium wants you to go for it.

    “The crowd is going ‘Go for it,’ and they’re just drinking beers and just going for it,” Mariucci said. “Sometimes you get swayed a little bit. So you’ve got to block them out and you’ve got to make sense of it all.

    “So then you start thinking about that article the guy from Cal wrote and then you say, ‘Well, what would he do in this situation?’ ”

    Along with Mariucci, Bill Belichick of the Super Bowl champion New England Patriots is one of several NFL head coaches who has actually studied Romer’s working paper, which, with references and tables, runs a stout 33 pages. Maybe it’s because Belichick graduated from Wesleyan University with a bachelor’s degree in economics.

    “I think, basically, he was saying that if you get down there and don’t score, you’re putting the other team 80, 90 yards away from the goal line anyway, and the chances of them scoring aren’t very good,” Belichick said. “You’ll probably get the ball back in good field position. And the percentages added up to his conclusion, which was to go for it.”

    Bill Walsh, another Bay Area professor with some serious tenure, is a believer.

    “To this day, I can close my eyes and see 22 players,” he said in his San Francisco 49ers office, where he still serves the team as a consultant. “I can see them moving and I can see the equation. My indicators would be somewhat different than (Romer’s), but this (equation) is what it takes.”

    Walsh looked closely at the tangle of letters and numbers.

    “It would be fine if I completely understood it,” he said. “But I don’t think you can get all the variables on one page. I don’t care what the equation is, you can’t get them all.”

    That said, Walsh agrees with Romer’s basic premise.

    “I think (coaches) can tend to be too conservative,” Walsh said. “They can tend not to trust themselves — in a sense, take the easy way out and, in this case, punt the ball.”

    Not the ‘obvious’ call
    About five years ago, Romer was listening to a Raiders game on the radio when a pivotal fourth-down situation came up.

    “The team kicked a field goal and the announcers discussed it long enough to say, ‘It’s obvious, it was clearly the right call,’ ” Romer said. “That bothered me. I was thinking about it some and then I realized that some of the tools I use in my economics work were going to be useful.”

    NFL Countdown
    ESPN’s Greg Garber spent time talking to David Romer and went around the NFL talking to coaches about the professor’s study. Tune in to ESPN at 11 a.m. ET Sunday to watch.

    Romer applied the Bellman Equation, which is used in economics and math to help simplify dynamic, long-term problems into the immediate payoff and the future ramifications of the situation.

    Based on statistics from actual NFL games from 1998 through 2000, Romer assigned a value to having the ball first-and-10 on each of the yard lines of the football field in terms of points scored. Since teams rarely go for it on fourth down — last year, the league’s 31 teams went for it a collective 468 times, an average of less than once per game — Romer decided it was not a representative sample. He elected instead to use third-down statistics in assessing probability. In addition, he used only first-quarter statistics because, generally speaking, score and time left did not influence decisions that early in a game.

    The findings of Romer’s analysis:
    A team facing fourth-and-goal within five yards of the end zone is better off, on average, trying for a touchdown.

    At midfield, on average, there is an argument to go for any fourth down within five yards of a first down.

    Even on its own 10-yard-line — 90 yards from the end zone — a team within three yards of a first down is marginally better off, on average, going for it.

    Of the 1,575 fourth downs in the sample where the analysis implied that teams were, on average, better off kicking, teams went for it only seven times. However, on the 1,100 fourth downs where the analysis implied that teams were, on average, better off going for it, they kicked 992 times.

    Translated, in the 1,100 instances where teams had more to gain in Romer’s estimation by going for it, they did so only 108 times, or less than 10 percent.

    The primary objection to the concept revolves around field position. A punt will generally net around 40 yards, and that’s a solid number coaches feel is worth that decision not to gamble.

    As Tampa Bay’s Warren Sapp says, “I’d rather defend an 80-yard field than a 40-yard field.”

    Romer freely admits there are many variables he doesn’t account for. This is the area football coaches wonder about.

    “Where are you in the game?” Fassel asked. “What’s the score of the game? Are you running the ball or passing?”

    “ It’s easy to sit there and apply a formula, but it’s not always the easiest thing to do on a Sunday. There’s so much more involved with the game than just sitting there, looking at the numbers and saying, ‘OK, these are my percentages, then I’m going to do it this way,’ because that one time it doesn’t work could cost your team a football game, and that’s the thing a head coach has to live with, not the professor. ”
    — Bill Cowher, Steelers head coach

    “Do we have the personnel to get that yard?” Walsh asked. “Do we have the personnel to stop the play they may run?”

    “Do we punt and use our timeouts?” Belichick asked. “Do we have confidence in our field-goal kicker? Are they going to blitz or not?

    “If I don’t get the first down, what are the repercussions?” asked Packers head coach Mike Sherman. “Are they moving the football? If you’re on the road and don’t get that fourth down the momentum is going to change over to the other team.”

    Momentum, according to coaches (see sidebar), is a matter of some consequence in fourth-down situations. But Romer — a man as serious as an economist can be — doesnt’ pretend to offer an infallible system, just a guideline. That’s why he couches his conclusions with the words “on average.”

    The skepticism, he allowed, does not surprise him.

    “That makes sense,” Romer said. “If they came to me and said they could use their ability to design plays to run monetary policy better, I would be skeptical.

    “I can’t tell them specifically what to do in particular cases, but on average they would be better off if they went for it in some cases where they now are always punting.”

    An intuitive sense
    On fourth down, it’s either-or, in or out, liberty or death. It’s the ultimate game of chicken.

    “Everybody sitting in the stadium knows, hey, this is a big play,” Belichick said. “If you go for it, that you’re going to maintain possession and it’s going to give you another opportunity to score, or you’re going to give the ball to the other team and then you’re going to have to go through another series of plays to get it back — if you get it back.”

    Brian Billick, the cerebral head coach of the Baltimore Ravens, isn’t so sure about all of the professor’s numbers.

    “There are only two numbers,” Billick said. “And those are 50-50. You either make it, or you don’t.”

    And believe it or not, 50-50 is almost exactly the success/failure rate.

    Last year, teams made 203 of their 468 attempts on fourth down, or 43.4 percent. This year the number is up. Teams have converted 97 of their 191 fourth-down attempts, a .508 success rate. The number suggests Romer might be onto something. Nineteen of the league’s 32 teams are at 50 percent or better, and 23 teams have a better conversion rate on fourth down than third down.

    As you might expect, teams with their backs against the wall tend to go for it more often.

    As Miami head coach Dave Wannstedt says, “The key is to go on fourth down early in the game — when you don’t have to.”

    The winless Cincinnati Bengals, for instance, lead all teams with 15 tries (and only four successes) on fourth down. The Washington Redskins are second with 11 attempts on fourth down and five conversions, while Minnesota (5-for-10) is next. The quality of a team has a lot to do with its success rate. Last year, the St. Louis Rams, at 8-for-11, were the league’s best, with an astounding percentage of 72.7. The Tennessee Titans, at 2-for-15 (13.3) were the worst.

    Some teams are more aggressive than others. Under head coach Tom Coughlin, Jacksonville has gone for it 10 times and made seven. Philadelphia’s Andy Reid has already made six of nine tries. Last year he was an impressive 9-for-13. Only two AFC teams went for it more than Belichick’s Patriots a year ago. This year, the Patriots have already converted four of seven tries.

    What it really comes down to, Belichick said, is confidence. Confidence that your offense can get that yard or two, confidence that your defense can hold the opponent if the offense fails.

    “The more third-and-ones you make, the more likely you are to go for it on fourth-and-1,” Belichick said. “You also factor in the defensive side of the ball. How good of a short-yardage or goal-line team is your opponent? When you add those two up and you’re real good and you don’t think the other team is that proficient at it, that’s one thing. If it’s vice versa, then maybe that skews you.

    “In the end, it’s about intuition and recalling all of the experiences you’ve been through.”

    Said Billick, “It’s all about matchups. Can you win that matchup and get the yard or yards you need to? Do they have the wherewithal to stop you? In the end, it’s how good do you feel about your team that’s on the field executing.”

    Fourth-Down Decisions
    Editor’s note: Here are a few big fourth-down plays so far this season:

    Week 1 — Rams at Broncos: Trailing the Broncos 16-13 in the third quarter with the ball on Denver’s 9-yard line, the Rams went for it on 4th-and-1. Kurt Warner’s pass was incomplete and the Rams ended up losing their opener 23-16. “We will be aggressive in our approach,” Rams coach Mike Martz said. “Some may question it, but that’s how I’m going to approach it.”

    Week 2 — Giants at Rams: Facing fourth-and-inches with 2:53 left in the game, the Rams trailed the Cowboys 26-21. Despite the absence of starting left guard Tom Nutten, the Rams ran Marshall Faulk straight up the middle and he was stuffed for no gain before fumbling. The Rams did get the ball back but ended up losing 26-21.

    Week 5 — Giants at Cowboys: Trailing 21-17 and facing fourth-and-nine from the Giants 48 with 2:03 left in the game, Cowboys coach Dave Campo elected to punt. Dallas never got the ball back, losing 21-17. “I’m a little surprised they punted. I didn’t expect them to put it on their defense like that,” Giants defensive end Michael Strahan said.

    Week 8 — Bengals at Titans: There was no controversial decision involved here, but this fourth down decided the game. Trailing 30-24 with 1:08 left and facing fourth-and-one with a yard to go for a touchdown, Corey Dillon had a clear path to the end zone but tripped on pulling guard Matt O’Dwyer, coming up short as the Bengals remained winless.

    Week 8 — Bills at Lions: Trailing 24-17 and facing fourth-and-inches at the Buffalo 20 with 1:52 left in the game, Lions running back James Stewart was stuffed for no gain. The Bills took over, converted a first down and ran out the clock.

    Already this season, there have been some classic fourth-down decisions. When the Broncos decided to try a long Jason Elam field goal on Monday Night Football, Ravens cornerback Chris McAlister returned the miss 107 yards for a touchdown and an NFL record. Remember when Rams coach Mike Martz was looking at a field goal to tie a game in Week 1 against the Broncos and elected (unsuccessfully) to go for the touchdown? He’s still hearing about it. Caught in the nether region between the Patriots’ 30- and 40-yard lines, the Packers went for it on fouth-and-three. Brett Favre made it. Another advertisement for going for it? The Tennessee Titans, up by only two points, went for it on fourth-and-goal at the Jacksonville 1. Eddie George scored what turned out to be the clincher.

    “A lot of economics is about optimization,” Romer explained. “A lot of our models say that people are good optimizers, and we don’t think that people all know the Bellman Equation and they can’t all do calculus in their heads. We think that trial and error, survival of the fittest, imitation is going to cause people to get toward optimizing behavior. So the question is, why doesn’t it seem to be working here? Why are they being so much too conservative?

    “There’s got to be some force pushing them the other way. And what it looks like is there’s a natural human tendency, it may be a genetic one, to worry about the worse case. If you’re teaching your kid about crossing the street or you’re hunting a saber-tooth tiger a few thousand years ago, the worst case is really something terrible.

    “In this situation, the worst case really isn’t that bad — you go for it and you don’t get it, so they have the ball in better field position. There’s a medium-sized cost to failure and there’s a medium-sized reward to success — mainly, you get to keep the ball and the drive keeps going. Sometimes, what you need to say is, ‘Let’s just step back and look at the probabilities, look at the cost and the benefits.’ Work it all out and see what you get. Sometimes, your intuition is leading you very far astray.”

    The Steelers’ Bill Cowher, in his 11th season, has enjoyed the longest consecutive tenure of any NFL head coach. He has made the playoffs seven of his first 10 seasons and looks like a good bet for eight of 11. He didn’t get this far by randomly adapting the flavor of the month in the fashion-conscious NFL.

    “It’s easy to sit there and apply a formula, but it’s not always the easiest thing to do on a Sunday,” Cowher said. “There’s so much more involved with the game than just sitting there, looking at the numbers and saying, ‘OK, these are my percentages, then I’m going to do it this way,’ because that one time it doesn’t work could cost your team a football game, and that’s the thing a head coach has to live with, not the professor.

    “If we all listened to the professor, we may be all looking for professor jobs.”

    Greg Garber is a senior writer at ESPN.com.

    Agamemnon

    #14001
    Avatar photoAgamemnon
    Participant

    http://static.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/garber_greg/1453768.html

    Thursday, October 31, 2002
    Updated: November 1, 12:08 PM ET
    Momentum is key in fourth-down decisions
    By Greg Garber
    ESPN.com

    There are usually a handful of plays that determine the outcome of a football game. Fourth-down plays are almost always part of that equation.

    Fourth down is sort of a super-sized, ultra-concentrated distillation of the game itself.

    “Something big,” said Baltimore Ravens head coach Brian Billick, “is going to happen. Either you’re going to covert in a crucial situation that keeps a drive alive, that allows you to score, that makes a difference in the game, that gives your team a huge emotional lift. The reverse of that is you go for it, you take your chances, you get stoned and it’s a huge emotional drain for your team.

    “ Everybody’s excited about it until the play’s run. Then, half are excited and half aren’t. ”
    — Bill Belichick on going for it on fourth down

    “You pay your money, you take your chances.”

    The Denver Broncos thought they were being aggressive when they tried a long Jason Elam field goal against the Ravens in Week 4’s Monday night game. Problem was, Ravens cornerback Chris McAlister was lurking in the end zone and gathered in the ball that was well short. After a brief hesitation — and a crushing block from Ray Lewis — McAlister bolted 107 yards for a touchdown and an NFL record.

    The game’s chemistry had been altered. The Broncos were never seriously in the game thereafter.

    Those sharp swings of emotion are the biggest factors missing in David Romer’s analysis of fourth downs. The Cal-Berkeley economics professor was unable to account for momentum in his complicated formula that he says should prompt coaches to go for it more often on fourth down.

    “From a numbers standpoint, obviously, (the equation) made sense,” said San Francisco 49ers head coach Steve Mariucci. “Fourth downs & that’s a different animal. Am I going to go for a fourth-down-and-inches on my own 11-yard-line? There’s a certain common sense that needs to take place as to whether you even think about attempting it or not.”

    Romer has heard this sort of thing before. In fact, he and some associates recently began studying data on momentum swings. After looking at situations when one team receives the ball after a major event — say, a failed fourth down or a turnover — Romer said he believes that momentum is not an important factor.

    “The numbers seem to indicate that the team that gets the ball tends to let down a little bit,” Romer said. “And the team that loses the ball seems to rally some. Actually, I think it might turn out that the momentum shifts the other way than most people think.”

    The one thing everyone agrees on is that players — on both sides of the ball — love the high stakes of a fourth-down call.

    “In that state of mind, they’re reacting like the fans are,” said Miami Dolphins head coach Dave Wannstedt. “Everybody’s saying go for it and our players are out there saying go for it, but I think as a head coach you need to really look at the big picture.

    “I think our players would go for it on fourth down every time.”

    That would include, of course, injured quarterback Jay Fiedler. “You definitely get enthusiastic, you get fired up,” Fiedler said. “You see the offensive line’s eyes light up a little bit more. You want to hit the guy a little bit harder.”

    Miami teammate Zack Thomas: “If it’s a run play and they’re trying to get an inch, then that’s the best feeling in the world when you stop them. You hit them in the mouth and you get up and that’s the best. It gives you a little swagger.”

    But as New England Patriots head coach Bill Belichick pointed out, half of that enthusiasm subsides as soon as the play is over.

    “Everybody’s excited about it until the play’s run,” Belichick said. “Then, half are excited and half aren’t.”

    It’s the downside of that momentum swing that scares coaches.

    “It can backfire,” explained Oakland Raiders quarterback Rich Gannon. “You’re at the opponent’s 40-yard line and you’re feeling good about yourselves. You go for fourth-and-one and you don’t get it — now the team has a short field. They go down the field and score and now the momentum has swung again.”

    Greg Garber is a senior writer at ESPN.com.

    Agamemnon

    #14002
    Avatar photoAgamemnon
    Participant

    Bill Belichick Didn’t Consider Going For Fourth-And-18 Vs. Packers by Doug Kyed on Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 3:46PM Share this: Fancred The New England Patriots were stuck between a rock and a hard place Sunday late in the fourth quarter. Down five points to the Green Bay Packers with 2:40 left in the game, head coach Bill Belichick had to decide whether to go for the first down on fourth-and-18 or attempt a 47-yard field goal. Belichick picked the latter, Stephen Gostkowski missed, and the Patriots had to force a three-and-out on defense, which they failed to do. So, did the thought of going for it even cross Belichick’s mind? “No,” he answered succinctly Monday in a conference call.

    Perhaps it should have, according to Pats Pulpit’s Rich Hill: The Patriots lost 26-21 after the Packers were able to convert on third-and-4 before the two-minute warning.

    Read more at: http://nesn.com/2014/12/bill-belichick-didnt-consider-going-for-fourth-and-18-in-fourth-quarter/

    Belichick is right, but I am not lazy to make the argument for him. I just posted this stuff for the people who really want to dig into some coaching decisions.

    • This reply was modified 9 years, 11 months ago by Avatar photoAgamemnon.

    Agamemnon

    #14004
    Avatar photoAgamemnon
    Participant

    http://blog.masslive.com/patriots/2014/12/should_the_patriots_have_gone.html
    Should the Patriots have gone for it on 4th-and-18? The numbers, and common sense, say no
    Belichick McCarthy.jpg
    Green Bay Packers head coach Mike McCarthy talks to New England Patriots head coach Bill Belichick after an NFL football game Sunday, Nov. 30, 2014, in Green Bay, Wis. The Packers won 26-21.(AP Photo/Mike Roemer)
    Kevin Duffy | krduffy@masslive.com By Kevin Duffy | krduffy@masslive.com
    Follow on Twitter
    on December 01, 2014 at 7:00 AM, updated December 01, 2014 at 7:03 AM

    GREEN BAY, Wisc — If you’re pinning this loss on Bill Belichick for electing to kick a field goal on 4th-and-18, you must know this: You’re wrong.

    There’s really no other way to say it, and it’s really not even an argument.

    Here’s how the whole sequence went down: Trailing 26-21 thanks to a dropped pass by Davante Adams, the Pats began their final possession with 8:35 remaining.

    Early in the game, the Patriots had elected to punt twice from near midfield—on a 4th-and-2 from their own 46-yard-line and a 4th-and-1 from the 49.

    Makes sense.

    Faced with a similar decision late, Belichick gave Tom Brady the go-ahead. Brady hooked up with Edelman for a 5-yard-gain on 4th-and-3 from the Pats’ 49, keeping the final Patriots drive alive.

    Except the drive stalled when Brady took a 9-yard-sack at the worst possible time, putting the Pats in a difficult situation on 4th-and-18.

    One school of thought: Well, if they went for it on fourth down once, why not go again? Why kick the field goal and give Rodgers a chance to run the clock out (which is precisely what happened)?

    One site, AdvancedFootballAnalytics.com, predicts a 12 percent success rate for the exact situation with which the Patriots were faced, 4th-and-18 from the opponent’s 29-yard-line with 2:40 remaining. The same site predicts a 64 percent success rate for a field goal attempt.

    And, for what it’s worth, Stephen Gostkowski is the third-most accurate field goal kicker in league history. Odds are he was hitting the 47-yarder, even if the conditions weren’t ideal (just a note: Gostkowski went out to 53 in warmups but didn’t have much distance to spare when he hit his final kick).

    If Gostkowski had converted, the Patriots simply would have needed another field goal to leave Lambeau with a win. They would have needed to force a three-and-out, or recover an onside kick, but the odds of Gostkowski converting the field goal and the Patriots earning another possession were undoubtedly higher than the 12 percent chance they’d convert a 4th-and-18 and then score a touchdown after the near-impossible conversion.

    And no, Green Bay didn’t have a single three-and-out Sunday. Its offense was in another stratosphere. Its third down offense was remarkable; Packers were 5-for-12 on third down conversions of four yards or longer and 5-for-5 in short-yardage situations.

    On a 3rd-and-4 with 2:28 left, it looked as though the Pats were in perfect position to hand the ball back to Brady. But Aaron Rodgers fit a perfect throw into a tight window, connecting with Randall Cobb for a game-clinching 7-yard-gain. And that prompted this reaction from the New England sidelines:

    In the postgame, Brady said, “This was a great test for us. I think the guys knew how important it was for our season, and you hate to have the ball on the 20-yard line under three minutes with a chance to go ahead and not do it. I think that sucked.”

    Yes, for the Patriots, the end result did. But it’s foolish to think going for it on 4th-and-18 would have given New England a better chance to change the outcome.

    © 2014 masslive.com. All rights reserved.

    Agamemnon

    #14008
    Avatar photojoemad
    Participant

    Week 1 — Rams at Broncos: Trailing the Broncos 16-13 in the third quarter with the ball on Denver’s 9-yard line, the Rams went for it on 4th-and-1. Kurt Warner’s pass was incomplete and the Rams ended up losing their opener 23-16. “We will be aggressive in our approach,” Rams coach Mike Martz said. “Some may question it, but that’s how I’m going to approach it.”

    Week 2 — Giants at Rams: Facing fourth-and-inches with 2:53 left in the game, the Rams trailed the Cowboys 26-21. Despite the absence of starting left guard Tom Nutten, the Rams ran Marshall Faulk straight up the middle and he was stuffed for no gain before fumbling. The Rams did get the ball back but ended up losing 26-21.

    Fucking Martz……. The Denver game was a killer, put the friggen points on the board when you’re on the road….

    but last week, I think Fisher has to go for it on 4th and 1 on the goal line vs Arizona…….

    #14009
    Avatar photoAgamemnon
    Participant

    Week 1 — Rams at Broncos: Trailing the Broncos 16-13 in the third quarter with the ball on Denver’s 9-yard line, the Rams went for it on 4th-and-1. Kurt Warner’s pass was incomplete and the Rams ended up losing their opener 23-16. “We will be aggressive in our approach,” Rams coach Mike Martz said. “Some may question it, but that’s how I’m going to approach it.”

    Week 2 — Giants at Rams: Facing fourth-and-inches with 2:53 left in the game, the Rams trailed the Cowboys 26-21. Despite the absence of starting left guard Tom Nutten, the Rams ran Marshall Faulk straight up the middle and he was stuffed for no gain before fumbling. The Rams did get the ball back but ended up losing 26-21.

    Fucking Martz……. The Denver game was a killer, put the friggen points on the board when you’re on the road….

    but last week, I think Fisher has to go for it on 4th and 1 on the goal line vs Arizona…….

    Me, too, joe, on both counts,,,,,,.

    • This reply was modified 9 years, 11 months ago by Avatar photoAgamemnon.

    Agamemnon

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.