What would be the best alternative during a dead-stick approach? (Disclaimer: I am not a pilot so my understanding of things may be really broken)

If a plane has lost engine power, has limited altitude to work with, and is upwind of a landing strip, and the pilot doesn't believe she has enough glide range to pass the appropriate runway and turn around for a landing into the wind on the full length of the runway, would it make more sense to

(a) land directly on the full length of the runway, accepting the tailwind

or 

(b) pass part of the runway, turn 180, and land into the wind using only, let's say, half the runway length

Assume that an emergency has been declared, airspace and runway are all cleared, etc. In my particular scenario we're talking about a single-seat, single-engine fighter-type plane with generally poor glide ratio. I'm curious about any contributing factors.
Attempting a tight turn, while low and slow, is an almost certain recipe for disaster.

Your first option of landing with a tailwind is possibly preferable - there is no inherent danger landing with a tailwind - it'll extend your landing, and is not ideal. However, it is much safer than trying to maneuver into a position with a headwind with only part of the runway remaining. And with a short runway to start with (if that was the case) you might not have enough distance to land safely anyway.

There is a third option, with the setup you describe, which is to completly disregard the (seemingly) obvious runway close by and look for a suitable area to land in front - a field, a highway, a beach - any of the usualy places you might make an emergency landing in the case of an engine failure.

(Disclaimer: My experience is with single engine propeller aircraft, but I am fairly sure the mantra of Aviate, Navigate, Communicate applies to all aircraft types. Really, in this situation its only the aviate that is relevant)