What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

**Packers at Lions** (-3.5, 51.5) TNF 8:15 (3 Viewers)

Nice win by the Lions. Their defense looks like it may be in trouble though. Starting to show signs of cracking with these second halfs.
Patchwork for sure up front with the injuries. GB slow to adjust to the press Packages the Lions had in to compensate.
 
That was a heck of a game last night. But , even though Campbell had me nervous as a wh*** in church with them 4th down plays, I don’t think any other coach in the nfl would have won this game with this team. Great job by Detroit and Dan campbell!
 
Coming in here admittingly biased but I want some others opinions: Where the refs FVcking awful last night or am I just a grumpy old man?

Some calls I felt were terrible:
- Lions 1st drive 3rd and goal--> PI call super soft... Lions probably settle for 3 from the 7 but with DC ya never know
- Packers 1st or 2nd drive---> 3rd down pressure. Love throwaway but Z smith smokes him in the head. Clear and obvious (moves GB into DET territory instead of punting)
- ASB hands to the face on the block on mckinney. Makes it 1st and goal from the 18 instead of 2nd and goal from the 2. Lions were down 4 at the time. Maybe GB gets a stop- probably not?
- Play after that Nixon comes through the gap free on a blitz and gets horsecollar tackled. Goff throws a TD. Blatant missed call.
- The OPI On watson in the endzone is whatever to me-- takes 7 and makes it 3---> but how can you allow DET to get away with the pick/block on the next drive after that?

I'd love to see round 3 in the playoffs with both teams a little bit healthier. For all the talk of DET injuries (and there are a ton)-- in the 4th quarter, GB was playing without 3 of their 4 secondary starters + their best coverage and speed LB and it really showed.

I kind of am starting to grow a hate for DET which means DC, ASB, and those guys must be doing some stuff right lol
 
Forward down the field,
A charging team that will not yield.
And when the Blue and Silver wave,
Stand and cheer the brave.
Rah, Rah, Rah.
Go hard, win the game.
With honor you will keep your fame.
Down the field and gain,
A Lion victory!
 
Dan is 6-2 against Green Bay so yeah I’m going to trust he knows what he’s doing and is actually winning us games not losing them. He’s probably the only coach in the league who actually is aggressive. Not to mention, the defense was giving up 10 yards per pass. They gave a valiant effort but the offense is the strength of this team and it’s very fair to ask them to seal the game and protect the severely undermanned defense from having to come up with another stop.
 
Great game, loved the way the Packers stormed the Dome start of the 3rd to go from 17-7 at Halftime to 21-17, showed a lot of resiliency I thought
The Packers are going to be a real WIldcard in the Playoffs, capable of knocking off a superior team on any given Sunday

The Lions? I didn't realize their Defense was so giving. I would be concerned abut that vs a team like Philly that does seem to have a better Defense at the moment
Could slow the Lions down a bit

Outstanding game, love the heart of the Lions and Campbell going for it on 4th down where other coaches would have immediately trotted out the Kicker
One of the best football games I've watched start to finish, didn't even post much in this thread, was glued to the game, that doesn't happen often
 
Last edited:
I do love Dan Campbell as a coach

Wish that LaFleur had his killer mentality
I agree about LaFleur but no way would I want that meathead for my head coach.

The meathead has beaten the Packers 6 of the last 7.
How many Super Bowls does he have?

today? same as Matt LaFleur

that answer might change in 65 days tho
Exactly my point.
 
This coach will cost them a title.

:rolleyes: you're not allowed to say that on these boards apparently
It’s certainly possible.

Dude gave GB the ball at his own 30. With the wrong RB.

That’s just foolishness.
He also scored two TDs on 4th downs
Not from his own 30.

You seem to be missing that important plot point.

He coached last night like he knows his defense won't make any stops (reminds me of a SB the Eagles were in). It's the way they'll have to win game against good teams until they get healthy on defense (if that ever happens).
 
Yeah, the disparity between how good your current offense is vs your current defense changes the equation a lot. It's not a one size fits all call.
 
Coming in here admittingly biased but I want some others opinions: Where the refs FVcking awful last night or am I just a grumpy old man?

Some calls I felt were terrible:
- Lions 1st drive 3rd and goal--> PI call super soft... Lions probably settle for 3 from the 7 but with DC ya never know
- Packers 1st or 2nd drive---> 3rd down pressure. Love throwaway but Z smith smokes him in the head. Clear and obvious (moves GB into DET territory instead of punting)
- ASB hands to the face on the block on mckinney. Makes it 1st and goal from the 18 instead of 2nd and goal from the 2. Lions were down 4 at the time. Maybe GB gets a stop- probably not?
- Play after that Nixon comes through the gap free on a blitz and gets horsecollar tackled. Goff throws a TD. Blatant missed call.
- The OPI On watson in the endzone is whatever to me-- takes 7 and makes it 3---> but how can you allow DET to get away with the pick/block on the next drive after that?

I'd love to see round 3 in the playoffs with both teams a little bit healthier. For all the talk of DET injuries (and there are a ton)-- in the 4th quarter, GB was playing without 3 of their 4 secondary starters + their best coverage and speed LB and it really showed.

I kind of am starting to grow a hate for DET which means DC, ASB, and those guys must be doing some stuff right lol
They are always awful.

And this coming from a guy whose team only won their last 3 Super Bowls because of the refs.
 
The Lions? I didn't realize their Defense was so giving. I would be concerned abut that vs a team like Philly that does seem to have a better Defense at the moment
When you look at the Lions roster week one, the Lions only had one of their top 5 linebackers (Jack Campbell) and one of their 9 defensive lineman (Alim McNeill) active for the Packers game and McNeill got hurt in the 2nd quarter. So for the 2nd half, we only had ONE of the 14 available in our front 7. A bunch of them will be back soon.
 
Coming in here admittingly biased but I want some others opinions: Where the refs FVcking awful last night or am I just a grumpy old man?

Some calls I felt were terrible:
- Lions 1st drive 3rd and goal--> PI call super soft... Lions probably settle for 3 from the 7 but with DC ya never know
- Packers 1st or 2nd drive---> 3rd down pressure. Love throwaway but Z smith smokes him in the head. Clear and obvious (moves GB into DET territory instead of punting)
- ASB hands to the face on the block on mckinney. Makes it 1st and goal from the 18 instead of 2nd and goal from the 2. Lions were down 4 at the time. Maybe GB gets a stop- probably not?
- Play after that Nixon comes through the gap free on a blitz and gets horsecollar tackled. Goff throws a TD. Blatant missed call.
- The OPI On watson in the endzone is whatever to me-- takes 7 and makes it 3---> but how can you allow DET to get away with the pick/block on the next drive after that?

I'd love to see round 3 in the playoffs with both teams a little bit healthier. For all the talk of DET injuries (and there are a ton)-- in the 4th quarter, GB was playing without 3 of their 4 secondary starters + their best coverage and speed LB and it really showed.

I kind of am starting to grow a hate for DET which means DC, ASB, and those guys must be doing some stuff right lol
They are always awful.

And this coming from a guy whose team only won their last 3 Super Bowls because of the refs.

Actually surprised we still consider the NFL to be a sporting competition. Basically scripted WWE-style entertainment these days.

The only curiosity at this point is do they let Detroit finally win, or are they destined to get the Charlie Brown treatment?
 
FWIW 4th Down Bot thought they should have kicked
I was looking at this 4th Down Bot thing and what’s most interesting to me is the 4th and 1 the Lions failed on from their own 31. Not only did the bot say go for it, it didn’t even think it was a close call. 70% WP to go vs 64% to punt.

I think fans really overvalue the utility of punting, especially in a shootout like last night. There were 6 TD drives of 70 yards in that game. If the Lions punt and the Packers take over around their own 30, they’ve still got a good chance to score. Likewise if the Lions go for it and convert, they have a good chance to get points on that drive. When the offenses are better than the defenses, ball possession is a lot more valuable than field position.
 
He coached last night like he knows his defense won't make any stops (reminds me of a SB the Eagles were in). It's the way they'll have to win game against good teams until they get healthy on defense (if that ever happens).
I get that. I still think it's dumb.

I didn't say it was smart. There's a fine line between aggressive and reckless. I think Campbell was reckless yesterday.
 
I do love Dan Campbell as a coach

Wish that LaFleur had his killer mentality
Im happy LaFleur isn't as stupid

saw this on BlueSky

"The way I look at is this:

Do you think Packers fans wanted them to go for it or kick the field goal and give them the ball back?

If I’m a GB fan I was hoping for the latter."

best reply

I think if you Frank Luntz-style polled diehard fans and ask them if they prefer the opposing team do A or B in a high leverage situation, doing the opposite of their consensus would be a +EV outcome for the opposing team.
If I was a Packers fan I'm thrilled they go for it and pass on an opportunity to win the game.
 
There is a lot of herd mentality in coaching decisions. Kicking the ball has been traditionally what every coach does and analysis is not enough to change that. It is always easier to go along with the prevaing conventional wisdom.
 
IDK how you verify something ike this but someone at ESPN tweet the Lions win probability went down 3% on the fifth and final 4th down attempt.

That was the most Detroit-under-Dan-Campbell win ever, of course they won that way.

Love this team's identity.
 
IDK how you verify something ike this but someone at ESPN tweet the Lions win probability went down 3% on the fifth and final 4th down attempt.

That was the most Detroit-under-Dan-Campbell win ever, of course they won that way.

Love this team's identity.
I guarantee the "calculator" didn't take into account how good the Lion's offense is and how injured the defense is. This discussion reminds me of as a beer league hockey goalie, I come out to play the puck if I can get to it first and the other team would get a breakaway otherwise. 90% of the time, I get to it 1st and shoot it away, meaning 10% of the time, they score. If I stayed in net, I might stop 70% of the breakaways. Yet I get grief for playing the puck (IDGAF) and saving 20% more goals. The human mind is funny.
 
FWIW 4th Down Bot thought they should have kicked
I was looking at this 4th Down Bot thing and what’s most interesting to me is the 4th and 1 the Lions failed on from their own 31. Not only did the bot say go for it, it didn’t even think it was a close call. 70% WP to go vs 64% to punt.

I think fans really overvalue the utility of punting, especially in a shootout like last night. There were 6 TD drives of 70 yards in that game. If the Lions punt and the Packers take over around their own 30, they’ve still got a good chance to score. Likewise if the Lions go for it and convert, they have a good chance to get points on that drive. When the offenses are better than the defenses, ball possession is a lot more valuable than field position.
Yeah, so much of the analytic debate over 4th down conversions boils down to the fact that people underrate the value of possession and overrate the importance of field position. That and loss aversion (focusing too much on the downsides of a negative outcome).
 
There is a lot of herd mentality in coaching decisions. Kicking the ball has been traditionally what every coach does and analysis is not enough to change that. It is always easier to go along with the prevaing conventional wisdom.
There is a reason it is conventional wisdom.
 
IDK how you verify something ike this but someone at ESPN tweet the Lions win probability went down 3% on the fifth and final 4th down attempt.

That was the most Detroit-under-Dan-Campbell win ever, of course they won that way.

Love this team's identity.
Not sure about the tweet, but if you look at the WP Calculator on ESPN's game page, it shows the Lions with a 91.6% WP on 4th and 1 and a 91.8% after they got the first down. Which suggests that 92% was basically the odds that Bates makes the kick, and the calculator wasn't giving much probability to GB winning the game if he did. (That's not just because it wold be unlikely that they could put together a FG drive in 30 seconds, but also because even if they did, that would only get them to OT, where their WP would still be below 50%)
 
He coached last night like he knows his defense won't make any stops (reminds me of a SB the Eagles were in). It's the way they'll have to win game against good teams until they get healthy on defense (if that ever happens).
I get that. I still think it's dumb.

I didn't say it was smart. There's a fine line between aggressive and reckless. I think Campbell was reckless yesterday.
Agreed.
 
FWIW 4th Down Bot thought they should have kicked
I was looking at this 4th Down Bot thing and what’s most interesting to me is the 4th and 1 the Lions failed on from their own 31. Not only did the bot say go for it, it didn’t even think it was a close call. 70% WP to go vs 64% to punt.

I think fans really overvalue the utility of punting, especially in a shootout like last night. There were 6 TD drives of 70 yards in that game. If the Lions punt and the Packers take over around their own 30, they’ve still got a good chance to score. Likewise if the Lions go for it and convert, they have a good chance to get points on that drive. When the offenses are better than the defenses, ball possession is a lot more valuable than field position.
Yeah, so much of the analytic debate over 4th down conversions boils down to the fact that people underrate the value of possession and overrate the importance of field position. That and loss aversion (focusing too much on the downsides of a negative outcome).
It’s difficult, some might say “impossible” to overrate the value of giving your opponent the ball at your own 30 in a 1-score game.

That’s absolutely insane. The Lions defense had made stops in this game. Punt the ball. Live to fight another down.

That short of a field is just inexcusable. No one is overrating that. It is what it is. Handing an opponent 3, and possibly 7 points is cuckoo banana pants.
 
FWIW 4th Down Bot thought they should have kicked
I was looking at this 4th Down Bot thing and what’s most interesting to me is the 4th and 1 the Lions failed on from their own 31. Not only did the bot say go for it, it didn’t even think it was a close call. 70% WP to go vs 64% to punt.

I think fans really overvalue the utility of punting, especially in a shootout like last night. There were 6 TD drives of 70 yards in that game. If the Lions punt and the Packers take over around their own 30, they’ve still got a good chance to score. Likewise if the Lions go for it and convert, they have a good chance to get points on that drive. When the offenses are better than the defenses, ball possession is a lot more valuable than field position.
Yeah, so much of the analytic debate over 4th down conversions boils down to the fact that people underrate the value of possession and overrate the importance of field position. That and loss aversion (focusing too much on the downsides of a negative outcome).
It’s difficult, some might say “impossible” to overrate the value of giving your opponent the ball at your own 30 in a 1-score game.

That’s absolutely insane. The Lions defense had made stops in this game. Punt the ball. Live to fight another down.

That short of a field is just inexcusable. No one is overrating that. It is what it is. Handing an opponent 3, and possibly 7 points is cuckoo banana pants.
I don't have a strong opinion one way or another on that particular call, but again, you are focusing only on the downside. It is NOT handing them points if the most likely result of the play is that you get a first down.

The whole point of analytics and WP% is that it looks at all the possible outcomes of a decision and analyzes its impact on a team's likelihood of winning. And in this case, it shows that on average, going for it will increase the chances that you win the game. Not 100% of the time, but more often than most people intuitively think.

I also hate the notion that Campbell's aggressiveness will eventually "cost" the Lions a big game. Coaches make a bunch of decisions, and if they turn out badly that can hurt a team's WP%. But being overly conservative can hurt them, too; it's just not always so readily apparent. Mike McCarthy spent the entire first half of the 2014 NFCCG his team was dominating kicking FGs on 4th and short, and you can draw a pretty direct line between him failing to extend the lead more and Seattle having just enough to complete the comeback and send the game to OT. But when people talk about the game they mostly focus on the Seahawks' amazing comeback or Bostic failing to catch the onside kick. People rarely remember McCarthy's hyper-conservatism. But it undoubtedly played a role in GB's collapse
 
There is a lot of herd mentality in coaching decisions. Kicking the ball has been traditionally what every coach does and analysis is not enough to change that. It is always easier to go along with the prevaing conventional wisdom.
There is a reason it is conventional wisdom.

No, there really isn't. It is like Blackjack, before there were computer computations running billions of simulated hands, people played too conservative not to lose (bust). Now the computer simulations show conventional wisdom is way too conservative. Dan calls a game closer to what the computer models say than any coach in the league, but alters it slightly based on the team's strengths and opponents weakness.
 
Last edited:
FWIW 4th Down Bot thought they should have kicked
I was looking at this 4th Down Bot thing and what’s most interesting to me is the 4th and 1 the Lions failed on from their own 31. Not only did the bot say go for it, it didn’t even think it was a close call. 70% WP to go vs 64% to punt.

I think fans really overvalue the utility of punting, especially in a shootout like last night. There were 6 TD drives of 70 yards in that game. If the Lions punt and the Packers take over around their own 30, they’ve still got a good chance to score. Likewise if the Lions go for it and convert, they have a good chance to get points on that drive. When the offenses are better than the defenses, ball possession is a lot more valuable than field position.
Yeah, so much of the analytic debate over 4th down conversions boils down to the fact that people underrate the value of possession and overrate the importance of field position. That and loss aversion (focusing too much on the downsides of a negative outcome).
It’s difficult, some might say “impossible” to overrate the value of giving your opponent the ball at your own 30 in a 1-score game.

That’s absolutely insane. The Lions defense had made stops in this game. Punt the ball. Live to fight another down.

That short of a field is just inexcusable. No one is overrating that. It is what it is. Handing an opponent 3, and possibly 7 points is cuckoo banana pants.
I don't have a strong opinion one way or another on that particular call, but again, you are focusing only on the downside. It is NOT handing them points if the most likely result of the play is that you get a first down.

The whole point of analytics and WP% is that it looks at all the possible outcomes of a decision and analyzes its impact on a team's likelihood of winning. And in this case, it shows that on average, going for it will increase the chances that you win the game. Not 100% of the time, but more often than most people intuitively think.

I also hate the notion that Campbell's aggressiveness will eventually "cost" the Lions a big game. Coaches make a bunch of decisions, and if they turn out badly that can hurt a team's WP%. But being overly conservative can hurt them, too; it's just not always so readily apparent. Mike McCarthy spent the entire first half of the 2014 NFCCG his team was dominating kicking FGs on 4th and short, and you can draw a pretty direct line between him failing to extend the lead more and Seattle having just enough to complete the comeback and send the game to OT. But when people talk about the game they mostly focus on the Seahawks' amazing comeback or Bostic failing to catch the onside kick. People rarely remember McCarthy's hyper-conservatism. But it undoubtedly played a role in GB's collapse
As I’ve said, I have no issue with any of his 4th down decisions, even the one at the end - I figured if he doesn’t get it, it goes to OT so there’s no way to lose on that play, but milking the clock & kicking the FG wins it for sure.

It’s just the 1 play. I find it indefensible. “Aggression” doesn’t remotely describe it.

And yes, I’m focusing on the downside. Which in that case seemed to vastly outweigh any upside. I saw absolutely no point to that play but “this is what we do”, which really should be within reason. In that case it was unreasonable.z

I agree with much of what you’re saying. However I do have strong feels about that 1 play. It seems silly.

And since you mention it, it certainly is possible that a decision like that could cost them a postseason win.
 
A couple other thoughts

- We were laughing and calling LaFluer a wuss when he called the fake 4th down play trying to draw Detroit offsides and it's even funnier now
- One thing Detroit's commitment to going for it on 4th down does is change the way defenses play them. Every other offense is only forcing defenses to defend 3 downs. Detroit forces them to defend 4 downs. That means every defensive down against the Lions has to be played with a different approach than every other team because Detroit is playing by a different set of parameters.
 
Last edited:
FWIW 4th Down Bot thought they should have kicked
I was looking at this 4th Down Bot thing and what’s most interesting to me is the 4th and 1 the Lions failed on from their own 31. Not only did the bot say go for it, it didn’t even think it was a close call. 70% WP to go vs 64% to punt.

I think fans really overvalue the utility of punting, especially in a shootout like last night. There were 6 TD drives of 70 yards in that game. If the Lions punt and the Packers take over around their own 30, they’ve still got a good chance to score. Likewise if the Lions go for it and convert, they have a good chance to get points on that drive. When the offenses are better than the defenses, ball possession is a lot more valuable than field position.
Yeah, so much of the analytic debate over 4th down conversions boils down to the fact that people underrate the value of possession and overrate the importance of field position. That and loss aversion (focusing too much on the downsides of a negative outcome).
It’s difficult, some might say “impossible” to overrate the value of giving your opponent the ball at your own 30 in a 1-score game.

That’s absolutely insane. The Lions defense had made stops in this game. Punt the ball. Live to fight another down.

That short of a field is just inexcusable. No one is overrating that. It is what it is. Handing an opponent 3, and possibly 7 points is cuckoo banana pants.
I don't have a strong opinion one way or another on that particular call, but again, you are focusing only on the downside. It is NOT handing them points if the most likely result of the play is that you get a first down.

The whole point of analytics and WP% is that it looks at all the possible outcomes of a decision and analyzes its impact on a team's likelihood of winning. And in this case, it shows that on average, going for it will increase the chances that you win the game. Not 100% of the time, but more often than most people intuitively think.

I also hate the notion that Campbell's aggressiveness will eventually "cost" the Lions a big game. Coaches make a bunch of decisions, and if they turn out badly that can hurt a team's WP%. But being overly conservative can hurt them, too; it's just not always so readily apparent. Mike McCarthy spent the entire first half of the 2014 NFCCG his team was dominating kicking FGs on 4th and short, and you can draw a pretty direct line between him failing to extend the lead more and Seattle having just enough to complete the comeback and send the game to OT. But when people talk about the game they mostly focus on the Seahawks' amazing comeback or Bostic failing to catch the onside kick. People rarely remember McCarthy's hyper-conservatism. But it undoubtedly played a role in GB's collapse
It’s way too soon to re-live the 2014 NFCCG……doubt that I will ever fully get over that loss
 
Coaches make a bunch of decisions, and if they turn out badly that can hurt a team's WP%. But being overly conservative can hurt them, too; it's just not always so readily apparent. Mike McCarthy spent the entire first half of the 2014 NFCCG his team was dominating kicking FGs on 4th and short, and you can draw a pretty direct line between him failing to extend the lead more and Seattle having just enough to complete the comeback and send the game to OT. But when people talk about the game they mostly focus on the Seahawks' amazing comeback or Bostic failing to catch the onside kick. People rarely remember McCarthy's hyper-conservatism. But it undoubtedly played a role in GB's collapse
I try to use this to my advantage in fantasy football. Mike McCarthy offenses almost always have a kicker you want to draft.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top