Post here when coaches do something you disagree with (2 Viewers)

[ignatiusjreilly]

Double screw-up by Lions and Bucs at the end of the game. Detroit was in victory formation, but they were snapping the ball with too much time left on the clock. By the time they got to third down, there were 37 seconds left and Tampa still had a timeout. They could have used it, forced Detroit to attempt a FG, and potentially gotten the ball back down 8 if the Lions missed (also possible they could have blocked the attempt). Instead, they let the clock run out

I thought perhaps the timeout-penalty-oops no charged timeout sequence at 3:02 confused someone. Nope, Todd Bowles said postgame “if we call a timeout then they just kick a FG with 12 seconds left, we’re not coming back from that.” Odd thinking but OK…except Jared Goff kneeled with like 15 seconds left TWICE; you absolutely could have called timeout at 35 seconds left.

Then it’s either a 49 yarder for a kicker who is 7 for 15 on 50+ FGA. Or force a punt - either of which you could block. PLUS you are def getting the ball back.

Unlikely to succeed but how do you not even try??

We were all going nuts as this was happening. It makes absolutely no sense to not use the timeout. Blocked kicks, bad snaps, missed FG's happen and it's your season on the line. Maybe Bowles gets a contract bonus for the number of timeouts he didn't use on the year. That is the only thing that makes sense to not use that timeout. This may be the dumbest coaching decision in the history of coaching decisions. It costs you nothing and even though it probably won't work. It's a much better chance of working then just letting the time run out. It's kind of like the lottery. Buying a ticket doesn't really give you a huge chance to win but it gives you an infinitely better chance than not buying a ticket at all.

Here's my guess at what happened: Once Detroit got the ball back with 1:33 left and Tampa only holding one timeout, it was clear they could kneel it out. So Bowles didn't bother using his timeout. Noticing that, Goff didn't bother letting the clock run down before the next two snaps. At that point, Bowles could have -- and should have -- capitalized on Goff's mistake in order to get the ball back, but I think he had already mentally conceded the game. He denied that it was some sort of gentleman's agreement, and I don't think it was explicitly, but I think it may have been operating at a subconscious level. I'm reminded of the time Schiano had the Bucs try to disrupt a victory formation in order to cause a fumble. It was portrayed as grubby and unsportsmanlike. I don't think Bowles using his timeout would have been criticized the same way, but I think that mindset may have led to him not doing it

 

[Gally]

Here's my guess at what happened: Once Detroit got the ball back with 1:33 left and Tampa only holding one timeout, it was clear they could kneel it out. So Bowles didn't bother using his timeout. Noticing that, Goff didn't bother letting the clock run down before the next two snaps. At that point, Bowles could have -- and should have -- capitalized on Goff's mistake in order to get the ball back, but I think he had already mentally conceded the game. He denied that it was some sort of gentleman's agreement, and I don't think it was explicitly, but I think it may have been operating at a subconscious level. I'm reminded of the time Schiano had the Bucs try to disrupt a victory formation in order to cause a fumble. It was portrayed as grubby and unsportsmanlike. I don't think Bowles using his timeout would have been criticized the same way, but I think that mindset may have led to him not doing it

Still the dumbest thing ever done. It is also nowhere near the attempt to drive through lineman trying to make a QB fumble on a kneel down. That is just dump and unsportsmanlike where you could seriously injury someone.

But I get what you are saying.......it still was idiotic not to call a timeout.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Sigh. More mindless anti-"analytics" straw-manning from Wilbon.

The craziest thing about this type of play in particular is that you don't even need to make a mathematical argument. It's just plain logic. If you go for two after the first TD, you have a shot at winning in regulation, while not making it any less likely that you'll get to OT. If you kick the XP both times, you have no chance of winning in regulation

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

You have Mahomes, Kelce and Pacheco all on fire and you try to ice the game on a handoff to Mecole Hardman?

Hardman had arguably the worst stat line in playoff history for a WR.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Here's my guess at what happened: Once Detroit got the ball back with 1:33 left and Tampa only holding one timeout, it was clear they could kneel it out. So Bowles didn't bother using his timeout. Noticing that, Goff didn't bother letting the clock run down before the next two snaps. At that point, Bowles could have -- and should have -- capitalized on Goff's mistake in order to get the ball back, but I think he had already mentally conceded the game. He denied that it was some sort of gentleman's agreement, and I don't think it was explicitly, but I think it may have been operating at a subconscious level. I'm reminded of the time Schiano had the Bucs try to disrupt a victory formation in order to cause a fumble. It was portrayed as grubby and unsportsmanlike. I don't think Bowles using his timeout would have been criticized the same way, but I think that mindset may have led to him not doing it

Still the dumbest thing ever done. It is also nowhere near the attempt to drive through lineman trying to make a QB fumble on a kneel down. That is just dump and unsportsmanlike where you could seriously injury someone.

But I get what you are saying.......it still was idiotic not to call a timeout.

Totally agree. I was mystified at what I was seeing. Truly couldn’t believe it.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

You have Mahomes, Kelce and Pacheco all on fire and you try to ice the game on a handoff to Mecole Hardman?

Hardman had arguably the worst stat line in playoff history for a WR.

He did, but did you hear about James Cook's fourth quarter? His over/under on rushing yards was 61.5, and after three quarters he had 67. His four rushes in the final period: -4, -3, 0, 1. Final stat line: 61 yards

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

He did, but did you hear about James Cook's fourth quarter? His over/under on rushing yards was 61.5, and after three quarters he had 67. His four rushes in the final period: -4, -3, 0, 1. Final stat line: 61 yards

Yeah, watched that go down. I was in shock. KC really sold out and BUF just got predictable.

Still pales next to 2 carries for 1 yard with 0 targets & 2 fumbles. lol

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

I had assumed Buffalo ran the fake punt because they saw that KC only had 10 men on the field, which would be a good call. But it turns out they called in the fake even before they saw KC's alignment. Seems like if you want to go for it on 4th down, better putting the ball in Allen's hands instead of Hamlin's

 

[rockaction]

Seems like if you want to go for it on 4th down, better putting the ball in Allen's hands instead of Hamlin's

Yeah, but then you can't imagine a gum-chewing coach saying, "That'll fool 'em!"

Agreed. Put the ball in Allen's hands.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Seems like if you want to go for it on 4th down, better putting the ball in Allen's hands instead of Hamlin's

Yeah, but then you can't imagine a gum-chewing coach saying, "That'll fool 'em!"

Agreed. Put the ball in Allen's hands.

I thought that was one of the worst play calls in playoff history.

Maybe if you’re up 3, go for the throat because a FG doesn’t really change things.

But down 3? Kick the f’n field goal, or like you said, use your elite offense to convert. That fake was doomed from the jump.

 

[rockaction]

The craziest thing about this type of play in particular is that you don't even need to make a mathematical argument. It's just plain logic. If you go for two after the first TD, you have a shot at winning in regulation, while not making it any less likely that you'll get to OT. If you kick the XP both times, you have no chance of winning in regulation

I don't think the argument for kicking the duck is so crazy, but that's me. I get the math. I get the logic. Something tells me that missing two two-point conversions is easier than we think and that it isn't just raw math. Football is also very much a game theory game that needs a new set of calculations given the score when it comes to strategy. The strategies don't happen in a vacuum. This is more relevant to the down 15 discussion, but it still holds a touch of weight here, even though it isn't much (eight points is still a one big score/one little score game).

 

[CalBear]

You have Mahomes, Kelce and Pacheco all on fire and you try to ice the game on a handoff to Mecole Hardman?

Andy Reid getting too cute dates back as far as Andy Reid.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

You have Mahomes, Kelce and Pacheco all on fire and you try to ice the game on a handoff to Mecole Hardman?

Andy Reid getting too cute dates back as far as Andy Reid.

I'm not a Chiefs fan, but I desperately want to see them add some proven WR talent next year. Watching the no-talent clowns they have now find new ways to blow games every week is too painful to watch

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Double screw-up by Lions and Bucs at the end of the game. Detroit was in victory formation, but they were snapping the ball with too much time left on the clock. By the time they got to third down, there were 37 seconds left and Tampa still had a timeout. They could have used it, forced Detroit to attempt a FG, and potentially gotten the ball back down 8 if the Lions missed (also possible they could have blocked the attempt). Instead, they let the clock run out

I thought perhaps the timeout-penalty-oops no charged timeout sequence at 3:02 confused someone. Nope, Todd Bowles said postgame “if we call a timeout then they just kick a FG with 12 seconds left, we’re not coming back from that.” Odd thinking but OK…except Jared Goff kneeled with like 15 seconds left TWICE; you absolutely could have called timeout at 35 seconds left.

Then it’s either a 49 yarder for a kicker who is 7 for 15 on 50+ FGA. Or force a punt - either of which you could block. PLUS you are def getting the ball back.

Unlikely to succeed but how do you not even try??

We were all going nuts as this was happening. It makes absolutely no sense to not use the timeout. Blocked kicks, bad snaps, missed FG's happen and it's your season on the line. Maybe Bowles gets a contract bonus for the number of timeouts he didn't use on the year. That is the only thing that makes sense to not use that timeout. This may be the dumbest coaching decision in the history of coaching decisions. It costs you nothing and even though it probably won't work. It's a much better chance of working then just letting the time run out. It's kind of like the lottery. Buying a ticket doesn't really give you a huge chance to win but it gives you an infinitely better chance than not buying a ticket at all.

The ONLY reason not to go nuts about it is that the odds of coming back from that (either Detroit makes the kick or, more likely, they punt and put them way back) with 30-odd seconds is really, really low. So it's very unlikely that it cost them a victory, or even a realistic shot at it.

That being said, it's a terrible mistake by Bowles. Anything north of zero percent chance should be attempted.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Double screw-up by Lions and Bucs at the end of the game. Detroit was in victory formation, but they were snapping the ball with too much time left on the clock. By the time they got to third down, there were 37 seconds left and Tampa still had a timeout. They could have used it, forced Detroit to attempt a FG, and potentially gotten the ball back down 8 if the Lions missed (also possible they could have blocked the attempt). Instead, they let the clock run out

I thought perhaps the timeout-penalty-oops no charged timeout sequence at 3:02 confused someone. Nope, Todd Bowles said postgame “if we call a timeout then they just kick a FG with 12 seconds left, we’re not coming back from that.” Odd thinking but OK…except Jared Goff kneeled with like 15 seconds left TWICE; you absolutely could have called timeout at 35 seconds left.

Then it’s either a 49 yarder for a kicker who is 7 for 15 on 50+ FGA. Or force a punt - either of which you could block. PLUS you are def getting the ball back.

Unlikely to succeed but how do you not even try??

We were all going nuts as this was happening. It makes absolutely no sense to not use the timeout. Blocked kicks, bad snaps, missed FG's happen and it's your season on the line. Maybe Bowles gets a contract bonus for the number of timeouts he didn't use on the year. That is the only thing that makes sense to not use that timeout. This may be the dumbest coaching decision in the history of coaching decisions. It costs you nothing and even though it probably won't work. It's a much better chance of working then just letting the time run out. It's kind of like the lottery. Buying a ticket doesn't really give you a huge chance to win but it gives you an infinitely better chance than not buying a ticket at all.

The ONLY reason not to go nuts about it is that the odds of coming back from that (either Detroit makes the kick or, more likely, they punt and put them way back) with 30-odd seconds is really, really low. So it's very unlikely that it cost them a victory, or even a realistic shot at it.

That being said, it's a terrible mistake by Bowles. Anything north of zero percent chance should be attempted.

I agree 100%.

That said, another perspective for me is that for the past 57 years I have rooted for a team that always found a way to lose. They would get out to a big lead and then turtle up. They would get beat by a record breaking long FG twice - by a guy with half a foot in 1970, by the GoAT kicker in 2021 (despite multiple missed penalties on the Ravens in the latter.)

We learned all manner of obscure rules as a result of the Lions finding another creative way to lose. From Calvin Johnson not completing the process, Jim Swartz throwing a challenge flag (Forsett was down, everyone saw it except the refs) bc a challenge wasn't allowed, the Seahawks illegal batting out of the back of the end zone in the final seconds, the phantom illegal hands to the face (it was the shoulder both time), the phantom facemask that allowed the untimed down for the "Fail Mary/Miracle in Motown", the 10 second runoff versus the Falcons after Tate was stopped inches short, the disallowed two point conversion bc the referee blew it on who was reporting.....it just goes on and on and on.

This year, this one friggin time, they screwed something up, and it didn't result in yet another unthinkable loss.

Brand. New. Lions.

 

[Gally]

The ONLY reason not to go nuts about it is that the odds of coming back from that (either Detroit makes the kick or, more likely, they punt and put them way back) with 30-odd seconds is really, really low. So it's very unlikely that it cost them a victory, or even a realistic shot at it.

There is NO REASON not to go nuts. You can't win if you don't play. The point is to win. It's your season on the line. It doesn't matter if you had a .000000000000000001% chance to win by calling a timeout. You call the timeout. There is absolutely no reason to keep it and give yourself a 0% chance to win.

I will say there was a reason not to call it on first down or second down because then the Lions adjust (hopefully for their sake) so the clock does run out. But once it got to 3rd down with 30+ seconds left you call the frickin time out. It's a fireable offense. It was that bad.

ETA: Plus as @BobbyLayne so eloquently elaborated above........it is the Lions so they have lot's of history losing games they shouldn't. Even more reason to call the time out!

 

[BobbyLayne]

ETA: Plus as @BobbyLayne so eloquently elaborated above........it is the Lions so they have lot's of history losing games they shouldn't. Even more reason to call the time out!

Pat McAfee said yesterday “if this was the same old Lions, Badgley hits a low line drive, the Bucs block it, run it back for a TD with 25 seconds left, and on the two point conversion they hand it to Vita Vea and he plows his 350 pound *** into the end zone, they win the game in OT. Thats SOL. Brand New Lions? Eh, screwed it up, but it doesn’t matter.”

 

[zed2283]

Somebody going for 2 yesterday to go down by 8.

Are you referring to the Bucs going for two after they scored to make it an eight-point game? Because that was absolutely the right call

Dumb call.

No, it was a great call. If they make it (45% chance) they can win with another TD and PAT. If they don't, they know they can go for 2 again later and still tie (another 45% chance). Odds aren't much worse than the risk of missing 1 of the 2 PAT's, so the chance to win in regulation makes it the smart play when the best you can do with 2 PAT's is OT and then a 50% chance of winning after that.

Looking at it another way, if you know you want to go for 2 and the win you are better off getting it out of the way first and that way if you don't win you still have a chance to tie with the second score.

The bolded is the only part I agree with.

I don't think the correct strategy cares if you agree or not.

Well I guess the strategy is one more data point incorrect today than it was on Sunday.

 

[jabarony]

This is more personnel-related than strategy/tactics related, but I think it belongs here.

On last night’s broadcast, the announcers said that when LaFleur was asked how he was dealing with his struggling kicker, his answer was “I’m praying every game that he does ok.”

That’s ridiculous when you’re a playoff team. If you’re a developing team, it’s ok to stick with a young struggling kicker if you believe in him. But if you’re a contender, you can’t afford to do that, because it could cost you a playoff game, and arguably did in this case. Carlson was clearly the worst kicker in the NFL and should have been replaced weeks ago. Just like the Lions did with Riley Patterson.

Yeah, this front office didn’t think the team was really a contender. They got caught off guard clearly…..

They could have picked up dozens of kickers off the street 2 weeks ago. They weren't bound to Carlson.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Somebody going for 2 yesterday to go down by 8.

Are you referring to the Bucs going for two after they scored to make it an eight-point game? Because that was absolutely the right call

Dumb call.

No, it was a great call. If they make it (45% chance) they can win with another TD and PAT. If they don't, they know they can go for 2 again later and still tie (another 45% chance). Odds aren't much worse than the risk of missing 1 of the 2 PAT's, so the chance to win in regulation makes it the smart play when the best you can do with 2 PAT's is OT and then a 50% chance of winning after that.

Looking at it another way, if you know you want to go for 2 and the win you are better off getting it out of the way first and that way if you don't win you still have a chance to tie with the second score.

The bolded is the only part I agree with.

I don't think the correct strategy cares if you agree or not.

Well I guess the strategy is one more data point incorrect today than it was on Sunday.

Even if that one data point mattered, Sunday didn't disprove anything. Only way that would happen is if they had scored twice and lost because they missed the 2PC both times

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

This is more personnel-related than strategy/tactics related, but I think it belongs here.

On last night’s broadcast, the announcers said that when LaFleur was asked how he was dealing with his struggling kicker, his answer was “I’m praying every game that he does ok.”

That’s ridiculous when you’re a playoff team. If you’re a developing team, it’s ok to stick with a young struggling kicker if you believe in him. But if you’re a contender, you can’t afford to do that, because it could cost you a playoff game, and arguably did in this case. Carlson was clearly the worst kicker in the NFL and should have been replaced weeks ago. Just like the Lions did with Riley Patterson.

Yeah, this front office didn’t think the team was really a contender. They got caught off guard clearly…..

They could have picked up dozens of kickers off the street 2 weeks ago. They weren't bound to Carlson.

That's what the Rams did

 

[jabarony]

Double screw-up by Lions and Bucs at the end of the game. Detroit was in victory formation, but they were snapping the ball with too much time left on the clock. By the time they got to third down, there were 37 seconds left and Tampa still had a timeout. They could have used it, forced Detroit to attempt a FG, and potentially gotten the ball back down 8 if the Lions missed (also possible they could have blocked the attempt). Instead, they let the clock run out

I thought perhaps the timeout-penalty-oops no charged timeout sequence at 3:02 confused someone. Nope, Todd Bowles said postgame “if we call a timeout then they just kick a FG with 12 seconds left, we’re not coming back from that.” Odd thinking but OK…except Jared Goff kneeled with like 15 seconds left TWICE; you absolutely could have called timeout at 35 seconds left.

Then it’s either a 49 yarder for a kicker who is 7 for 15 on 50+ FGA. Or force a punt - either of which you could block. PLUS you are def getting the ball back.

Unlikely to succeed but how do you not even try??

I just assumed that NBC had the graphic wrong and the Bucs had zero TOs left. I mean, how could both the Lions and the Bucs both be so dumb?

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

This whole year seems like a lot of stupid stuff going on. Starting with Sean Payton doing an onsides kick game 1, kickoff 1, to now. We have coaches running reverses at the goal line and fake punts from their own 30-yard line. Head scratching.

 

[zed2283]

This whole year seems like a lot of stupid stuff going on. Starting with Sean Payton doing an onsides kick game 1, kickoff 1, to now. We have coaches running reverses at the goal line and fake punts from their own 30-yard line. Head scratching.

Analytics.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

This whole year seems like a lot of stupid stuff going on. Starting with Sean Payton doing an onsides kick game 1, kickoff 1, to now. We have coaches running reverses at the goal line and fake punts from their own 30-yard line. Head scratching.

Analytics.

Gluten

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

This whole year seems like a lot of stupid stuff going on. Starting with Sean Payton doing an onsides kick game 1, kickoff 1, to now. We have coaches running reverses at the goal line and fake punts from their own 30-yard line. Head scratching.

Analytics.

I can't believe Analytics says to do an onside kick like Payton did.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

We learned all manner of obscure rules as a result of the Lions finding another creative way to lose. From Calvin Johnson not completing the process, Jim Swartz throwing a challenge flag (Forsett was down, everyone saw it except the refs) bc a challenge wasn't allowed, the Seahawks illegal batting out of the back of the end zone in the final seconds, the phantom illegal hands to the face (it was the shoulder both time), the phantom facemask that allowed the untimed down for the "Fail Mary/Miracle in Motown", the 10 second runoff versus the Falcons after Tate was stopped inches short, the disallowed two point conversion bc the referee blew it on who was reporting.....it just goes on and on and on.

My personal favorite was the time Johnson Bademosi got called for DPI when his facemask interfered with Dez Bryant's hands

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

This whole year seems like a lot of stupid stuff going on. Starting with Sean Payton doing an onsides kick game 1, kickoff 1, to now. We have coaches running reverses at the goal line and fake punts from their own 30-yard line. Head scratching.

Analytics.

the boogeyman!

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

This whole year seems like a lot of stupid stuff going on. Starting with Sean Payton doing an onsides kick game 1, kickoff 1, to now. We have coaches running reverses at the goal line and fake punts from their own 30-yard line. Head scratching.

Isn't Payton the guy who pulled off an onsides kick against the Colts to start the second half in the Super Bowl? Kind of on brand for him, no?

 

[Gally]

Starting with Sean Payton doing an onsides kick game 1, kickoff 1,

Seems like that is a great time to give it a go. The impact really isn't that big of a deal if you don't get it at that point. You have the whole game to make up for it. Why not try it?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Double screw-up by Lions and Bucs at the end of the game. Detroit was in victory formation, but they were snapping the ball with too much time left on the clock. By the time they got to third down, there were 37 seconds left and Tampa still had a timeout. They could have used it, forced Detroit to attempt a FG, and potentially gotten the ball back down 8 if the Lions missed (also possible they could have blocked the attempt). Instead, they let the clock run out

I thought perhaps the timeout-penalty-oops no charged timeout sequence at 3:02 confused someone. Nope, Todd Bowles said postgame “if we call a timeout then they just kick a FG with 12 seconds left, we’re not coming back from that.” Odd thinking but OK…except Jared Goff kneeled with like 15 seconds left TWICE; you absolutely could have called timeout at 35 seconds left.

Then it’s either a 49 yarder for a kicker who is 7 for 15 on 50+ FGA. Or force a punt - either of which you could block. PLUS you are def getting the ball back.

Unlikely to succeed but how do you not even try??

We were all going nuts as this was happening. It makes absolutely no sense to not use the timeout. Blocked kicks, bad snaps, missed FG's happen and it's your season on the line. Maybe Bowles gets a contract bonus for the number of timeouts he didn't use on the year. That is the only thing that makes sense to not use that timeout. This may be the dumbest coaching decision in the history of coaching decisions. It costs you nothing and even though it probably won't work. It's a much better chance of working then just letting the time run out. It's kind of like the lottery. Buying a ticket doesn't really give you a huge chance to win but it gives you an infinitely better chance than not buying a ticket at all.

Here's my guess at what happened: Once Detroit got the ball back with 1:33 left and Tampa only holding one timeout, it was clear they could kneel it out. So Bowles didn't bother using his timeout. Noticing that, Goff didn't bother letting the clock run down before the next two snaps. At that point, Bowles could have -- and should have -- capitalized on Goff's mistake in order to get the ball back, but I think he had already mentally conceded the game. He denied that it was some sort of gentleman's agreement, and I don't think it was explicitly, but I think it may have been operating at a subconscious level. I'm reminded of the time Schiano had the Bucs try to disrupt a victory formation in order to cause a fumble. It was portrayed as grubby and unsportsmanlike. I don't think Bowles using his timeout would have been criticized the same way, but I think that mindset may have led to him not doing it

This is 100% what happened. Once the Bucs didn't call a timeout on 1st down both coaches were operating under the assumption that they had essentially non-verbally agreed that the game was over. If he'd used the timeout there many would have considered it Bush League. But many still would have defended it and, rightfully, said it was stupid of the Lions to not still run down the playclock on each play regardless.

This kind of thing does happen sometimes in the regular season and no one thinks twice about it. The playoffs make it more pronounced.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

This whole year seems like a lot of stupid stuff going on. Starting with Sean Payton doing an onsides kick game 1, kickoff 1, to now. We have coaches running reverses at the goal line and fake punts from their own 30-yard line. Head scratching.

Analytics.

C'mon. Sean Payton won a Super Bowl kicking an onside kick to start the 2nd half against the Colts. The Eagles won a Super Bowl running a double reverse pass to the QB from the 1 yard line against the Patriots. The Gators won a National Championship faking a punt from their own 25 yard line.

And how many shovel passes and reverses did KC successfully convert for TDs from inside the 3 yard line on their Super Bowl runs? Tons.

These things don't always work but they have a pretty good conversion rate, often in big situations.

And besides, deep in your own territory is the only place you even CAN fake a punt anymore. It's not like it's 1995 where coaches are stuck in 1930's mindsets and you're going to shock the other team by faking a punt on 4th and 3 from the opposing team's 45 yard line. If you're not deep in your own territory.

Teams are much more aggressive now, and for the most part it's worked out really well for them, and the most aggressive coaches seem to be the ones playing in the Super Bowl most years, as well as the Championship game in college.

 

[Gally]

This kind of thing does happen sometimes in the regular season and no one thinks twice about it. The playoffs make it more pronounced.

While it may have happened in the regular season I have never seen it happen or remember hearing about this type of scenario happening when a team still was within one score. I have seen it more when it is a multiple score game and a team just doesn't use the timeouts.

I really doubt (although I guess anything is possible these days) there would be backlash if he used the time out. I just don't see how it could be seen as Bush league.

 

[Gally]

And how many shovel passes and reverses did KC successfully convert for TDs from inside the 3 yard line on their Super Bowl runs? Tons.

Game situation matters though. Running a shovel pass jet sweep when you are up by 3 TD's already or on the first drive of the game is different then running it half way through the 4th quarter when you are up 3 pts and have been ramming the ball down Buffalo's throat for the entire second half. Not all shovel passes are created equal and this was about the dumbest situation to do this type of play.....especially with a guy that had barely touched the ball all game and is likely cold on the sidelines.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

By having a coach who is known to gamble on 4th it makes the other team play safer. This means less setup for a big punt return since they are now in more of a protect mode.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

This kind of thing does happen sometimes in the regular season and no one thinks twice about it. The playoffs make it more pronounced.

While it may have happened in the regular season I have never seen it happen or remember hearing about this type of scenario happening when a team still was within one score. I have seen it more when it is a multiple score game and a team just doesn't use the timeouts.

I really doubt (although I guess anything is possible these days) there would be backlash if he used the time out. I just don't see how it could be seen as Bush league.

It definitely happens. Of course not something easily documented/searchable, but a quick search pulls up a few Reddit threads where the team DID call the timeout in that situation and people were annoyed by it because teams often don't bother using the timeout.

https://www.reddit.com/r/NFLNoobs/comments/xcwpit/what_is_the_point_in_calling_timeouts_when_the/

 

[Gally]

It definitely happens. Of course not something easily documented/searchable, but a quick search pulls up a few Reddit threads where the team DID call the timeout in that situation and people were annoyed by it because teams often don't bother using the timeout.

https://www.reddit.com/r/NFLNoobs/comments/xcwpit/what_is_the_point_in_calling_timeouts_when_the/

This seems to be in a different scenario where the timeout taken is only prolonging the kneel downs......but the kneel downs would still be happening. Meaning they weren't ever getting to a 4th down with the clock stopped where the losing team would be getting the ball back. In that type of situation (just making them kneel more with no chance to get the ball back regardless of taking the timeouts or not) I understand the backlash. I just don't understand where there would be any backlash taking the timeout after the 3rd down kneel to make the Lions kick/punt to get the ball back. To me this is a totally different scenario.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

It definitely happens. Of course not something easily documented/searchable, but a quick search pulls up a few Reddit threads where the team DID call the timeout in that situation and people were annoyed by it because teams often don't bother using the timeout.

https://www.reddit.com/r/NFLNoobs/comments/xcwpit/what_is_the_point_in_calling_timeouts_when_the/

This seems to be in a different scenario where the timeout taken is only prolonging the kneel downs......but the kneel downs would still be happening. Meaning they weren't ever getting to a 4th down with the clock stopped where the losing team would be getting the ball back. In that type of situation (just making them kneel more with no chance to get the ball back regardless of taking the timeouts or not) I understand the backlash. I just don't understand where there would be any backlash taking the timeout after the 3rd down kneel to make the Lions kick/punt to get the ball back. To me this is a totally different scenario.

That's essentially what happened here, just on 1st down.

1st down, 1:33 left, 1 timeout. If the Bucs take the timeout on 1st down, the Lions can still run the clock out with 2 more kneel downs. So the Bucs elect not to use the timeout, signaling they're not going to make them do the extra kneeldown and are just going to let it run out. This same scenario happens in the regular season sometimes. Given that it was the playoffs, the Lions should have still run the playclock down to 1 each time just to make sure. I agree with you and the consensus, if Bowles had eventually used the timeout more people would have been calling Campbell/Goff stupid for not running it down that calling Bowles bush league for pretending he was doing that same unwritten gentleman's agreement to end the game and then calling the timeout later, though there are definitely a lot of people that would've fallen into the latter category.

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

Starting with Sean Payton doing an onsides kick game 1, kickoff 1,

Seems like that is a great time to give it a go. The impact really isn't that big of a deal if you don't get it at that point. You have the whole game to make up for it. Why not try it?

The key problem with this is the Onsides Kick rules have changed so you can't get a running start with the kicking team. This really limits the kicking teams' chance at recovery of the kick.

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

I understand that being more aggressive is a good thing, but these things are situational. In the KC game, Pacheo is running like a mad man, and you have a chance to win the game essentially at like the two yard line. Give the man the ball twice in a row behind your lineman that are dominating the Bills D line. Safe and effective. If it doesn't work reassess with having a play with Mahomes where he has a run pass option.

If you feel the need to go for a 4th and short, especially when it is in your own territory with the best running QB in the game on your team, go with that guy. Not the inside punt blocker that is slow as molasses and doesn't run the ball normally.

Onsides kicks have had their rules changed where it is much harder to recover the kick. Starting the season off with a play that has a 5% or less chance of success is just dumb.

 

[Tau837]

It definitely happens. Of course not something easily documented/searchable, but a quick search pulls up a few Reddit threads where the team DID call the timeout in that situation and people were annoyed by it because teams often don't bother using the timeout.

https://www.reddit.com/r/NFLNoobs/comments/xcwpit/what_is_the_point_in_calling_timeouts_when_the/

This seems to be in a different scenario where the timeout taken is only prolonging the kneel downs......but the kneel downs would still be happening. Meaning they weren't ever getting to a 4th down with the clock stopped where the losing team would be getting the ball back. In that type of situation (just making them kneel more with no chance to get the ball back regardless of taking the timeouts or not) I understand the backlash. I just don't understand where there would be any backlash taking the timeout after the 3rd down kneel to make the Lions kick/punt to get the ball back. To me this is a totally different scenario.

That's essentially what happened here, just on 1st down.

1st down, 1:33 left, 1 timeout. If the Bucs take the timeout on 1st down, the Lions can still run the clock out with 2 more kneel downs. So the Bucs elect not to use the timeout, signaling they're not going to make them do the extra kneeldown and are just going to let it run out. This same scenario happens in the regular season sometimes. Given that it was the playoffs, the Lions should have still run the playclock down to 1 each time just to make sure. I agree with you and the consensus, if Bowles had eventually used the timeout more people would have been calling Campbell/Goff stupid for not running it down that calling Bowles bush league for pretending he was doing that same unwritten gentleman's agreement to end the game and then calling the timeout later, though there are definitely a lot of people that would've fallen into the latter category.

I don't agree with how you are characterizing this.

As you say, if the Bucs took the timeout after 1st down, it accomplishes nothing because the Lions still run out the clock. So not taking it doesn't amount to 'signaling' they aren't going to take it at all, it simply recognizes that fact. Once the Lions opened the door to using the timeout to force a 4th down play, that changed the situation, and the Bucs should have taken it.

 

[BobbyLayne]

If MCDC somehow makes the Super Bowl I’m fairly confident this thread will add 20 pages in February

 

[Gally]

As you say, if the Bucs took the timeout after 1st down, it accomplishes nothing because the Lions still run out the clock. So not taking it doesn't amount to 'signaling' they aren't going to take it at all, it simply recognizes that fact. Once the Lions opened the door to using the timeout to force a 4th down play, that changed the situation, and the Bucs should have taken it.

Exactly. This has been my point all along and why I really don't understand where there would be any backlash (other than maybe Lion fans) for calling the timeout. The situation changed. Now is the time to call a timeout because of what changed to now give you a chance to get the ball back.

 

[Gally]

Starting with Sean Payton doing an onsides kick game 1, kickoff 1,

Seems like that is a great time to give it a go. The impact really isn't that big of a deal if you don't get it at that point. You have the whole game to make up for it. Why not try it?

The key problem with this is the Onsides Kick rules have changed so you can't get a running start with the kicking team. This really limits the kicking teams' chance at recovery of the kick.

Which is all the more reason to try it on the opening kickoff because with the rules being changed the surprise is all you got. This is the best chance to recover one that you will ever have and still have plenty of time to recover from it if you don't recover the kick.

 

[Gally]

Onsides kicks have had their rules changed where it is much harder to recover the kick. Starting the season off with a play that has a 5% or less chance of success is just dumb.

You may not recover but that is far from making it "just dumb". A surprise gives you the best chance you will have and the downside is pretty minimal at that point in the game. Having a low success rate does not necessarily equate to being a dumb choice.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

As you say, if the Bucs took the timeout after 1st down, it accomplishes nothing because the Lions still run out the clock. So not taking it doesn't amount to 'signaling' they aren't going to take it at all, it simply recognizes that fact. Once the Lions opened the door to using the timeout to force a 4th down play, that changed the situation, and the Bucs should have taken it.

Exactly. This has been my point all along and why I really don't understand where there would be any backlash (other than maybe Lion fans) for calling the timeout. The situation changed. Now is the time to call a timeout because of what changed to now give you a chance to get the ball back.

But the point is the situation only changed because the Lions thought that the Bucs had signaled an unwritten sportsmanship agreement that they were going to let the clock run out. IE instead of everyone standing around under center until the clock runs down to 1 three times, they could snap it casually and everyone could jog off the field with 30 seconds left or whatever as the clock ticks down.

I agree Bowles should have said "eff it" and called the timeout, but the sole and only reason the Lions didn't milk the clock all the way down is because they were operating under the assumption that Bowles had conceded and was letting everyone take the quickest/easiest path back to the locker room. It's not like Detroit suddenly forgot what the playclock is.

This isn't anywhere near the first time this has happened. Just the first time on national TV in the playoffs with everyone paying attention.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

As you say, if the Bucs took the timeout after 1st down, it accomplishes nothing because the Lions still run out the clock. So not taking it doesn't amount to 'signaling' they aren't going to take it at all, it simply recognizes that fact. Once the Lions opened the door to using the timeout to force a 4th down play, that changed the situation, and the Bucs should have taken it.

Exactly. This has been my point all along and why I really don't understand where there would be any backlash (other than maybe Lion fans) for calling the timeout. The situation changed. Now is the time to call a timeout because of what changed to now give you a chance to get the ball back.

But the point is the situation only changed because the Lions thought that the Bucs had signaled an unwritten sportsmanship agreement that they were going to let the clock run out. IE instead of everyone standing around under center until the clock runs down to 1 three times, they could snap it casually and everyone could jog off the field with 30 seconds left or whatever as the clock ticks down.

I agree Bowles should have said "eff it" and called the timeout, but the sole and only reason the Lions didn't milk the clock all the way down is because they were operating under the assumption that Bowles had conceded and was letting everyone take the quickest/easiest path back to the locker room. It's not like Detroit suddenly forgot what the playclock is.

This isn't anywhere near the first time this has happened. Just the first time on national TV in the playoffs with everyone paying attention.

We have no idea why the Lions messed up the clock management there. All we know is that they did. 100% Bowles should've taken a timeout and there would've been zero blowback if he did. The Lions made a mistake, and only got away with it because the Bucs also made a mistake.

Contrary to your assertion I've been watching football for decades and never seen a team trailing by a single score voluntarily let the clock run out on themselves like the Bucs did. It happens all the time that teams opt not to use their timeouts when it wouldn't make a difference anyway, but this isn't like that at all.

 

[Tau837]

But the point is the situation only changed because the Lions thought that the Bucs had signaled an unwritten sportsmanship agreement that they were going to let the clock run out.

This is a big assumption on your part. You don't know this.

 

[SayWhat?]

This isn't anywhere near the first time this has happened. Just the first time on national TV in the playoffs with everyone paying attention.

This is for sure the first time this has happened, where a team had a chance to still compete in a one score game and opted not to. Any coach with half a brain, in a one score game, whom could stop the clock to force the other team to make a decision on attempting a field goal or punting, would do so. (And there were 30 seconds left!) The Bucs didn’t, and Bowles made a junior varsity level coaching decision as an NFL coach. He 100% gave up, and in the NFL playoffs no less. Absolutely fireable offense.

You go ahead and bump this thread when this happens again in the NFL, regular season or playoffs, and I will concede that this “happens” in the NFL.

 

[JAA]

I disagree with Mike McCarthy coaching the Dallas Cowboys for another season.

This eagles fan thinks it’s fine