Spartans Rule
Footballguy
I was discussing this with my brother, who started to argue for punting, then thought through the scenarios and said “I guess it comes down to whether you trust your offense or defense… in a 40-38 game.”
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Post here when coaches do something you disagree with (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter GreenNGold
- Start date
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Man I remember when Belichick went for it in this exact scenario against Manning in a similarly high scoring game years ago and got blasted for not punting.
How times have changed.
Deamon
Footballguy
Nothing has changed. People will always blast a decision if it doesn't end up working out. Hate when people judge the decision purely by the result.
Ravens go for it there and don't convert and lose, they would be blasted for not punting too.
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
Yes, there will always be people who criticize a decision with a bad result. But let's not all turn into moral relativists here. The decision to punt was bad process both according to analytics and basic logic (would you rather put your fate in Lamar/Henry getting three yards or your defense stopping Josh Allen?) I, along with plenty of other people in this thread, have been pretty consistent on this point for years now.
Also, I don't claim to know the minds of NFL HCs, but I suspect that fear of being criticized was never, and is not now, the motivating factor when it comes to in-game decisions. I think historically it's been the innate conservatism of coaches ("punting on 4th down is just what you do"). I'm not sure they've gotten any less conservative in recent years, but the ground has shifted into what's considered "acceptable".
Deamon
Footballguy
Sure but you don't even have to stop Allen if you don;'t convert. They're already in FG range for the game winner. If you don't convert that, you already lose.
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
OK first of all, none of that is true. There were two minutes left and the Ravens had at least two timeouts left. If the Bills didn't try to advance the ball, Baltimore would have gotten it back. Also, a 50+ yarder with an ancient kicker who's been on the team for less than a week is hardly a gimme.
But more importantly, are we really still doing the "If they get a bad result, they are less likely to win" thing? Yes, if they fail to convert, their win probability goes down. But if they don't even try to convert, their win probability also goes down. And if they do convert, the game is over.
Hmm, if only there were some way to balance all of the different probabilities and see if there was a decision that did the most to optimize their chances of winning ...
Deamon
Footballguy
And what did those probabilities show? I believe the probabilities were close, and it didn't take into consideration that Lamar was cramping badly and in a lot of pain at that moment.
Additionally on Harblow....Don't use your last 2 timeouts in a manner where the opposition has 30+ seconds to trot the FG team. Should have let the clock run. By the time Buffalo realized what was going on you could have created choas or used the timeout at 15 seconds which would force Buffalo to kick leaving you 10+ seconds and a timeout for a comeback.
Zow
Footballguy
He was correct at the time. He was just the first coach with the stones to stand by the math.
Zow
Footballguy
While I like Kellen Moore, his clock management decisions at the end of the first half made me scratch my head a bit. Basically, he kept his timeouts in his pocket even after the Cardinals seemed likely to score with ~1 minute left. I am including a brief article about it below. I had the Saints with the points on the game so I was invested and mildly frustrated and confused at the time (as was one of the announcers). As the article suggests, I think Moore was maybe trying to keep Rattler from a stressful situation. Otherwise, his comments seem nonsensical (they didn't get to play it out because they chose to permit for 40 seconds to run off the clock when Arizona was about to score).
________________________________________________________________________
What was going on in the New Orleans Saints' end-of-half sequence against the Arizona Cardinals? The Cardinals offense got down to the New Orleans red zone before a defensive penalty helped them out at the two-minute warning. And first-year head coach Kellen Moore kept his timeouts in his pocket as the Cardinals ran out the clock and inched closer to a go-ahead score.
And when Arizona scored on a 4-yard shovel pass from Kyler Murray to James Conner, leaving just 28 seconds on the clock, Moore settled for a quick Alvin Kamara rush up the middle before letting time expire. The Saints didn't advance past their own 35 yard line. Why did he go into halftime with all three timeouts going to waste?
"We were just trying to save our timeouts best we could. They did a good job of bleeding the clock out and putting themselves in a favorable position. We didn't get enough yards to play it out there at the end of the half," Moore told CBS Sports sideline reporter Tiffany Blackmon before heading to the locker room.
Either this was a rookie coach making a miscalculation, or it was a polite way of saying he didn't trust Spencer Rattler to lead a final-minute drive without turning the ball over. Rattler already got bailed out once in this game with a defensive penalty wiping out an interception. He threw more interceptions than touchdowns last season, too. With the Saints having won the opening coin toss and elected to receive the kick in the second half, this gives them some control over the situation in a one-score game. But it would've been nice to have a real shot at tying it up to play for the win rather than the tie in the third quarter.
This article origina
________________________________________________________________________
What was going on in the New Orleans Saints' end-of-half sequence against the Arizona Cardinals? The Cardinals offense got down to the New Orleans red zone before a defensive penalty helped them out at the two-minute warning. And first-year head coach Kellen Moore kept his timeouts in his pocket as the Cardinals ran out the clock and inched closer to a go-ahead score.
And when Arizona scored on a 4-yard shovel pass from Kyler Murray to James Conner, leaving just 28 seconds on the clock, Moore settled for a quick Alvin Kamara rush up the middle before letting time expire. The Saints didn't advance past their own 35 yard line. Why did he go into halftime with all three timeouts going to waste?
"We were just trying to save our timeouts best we could. They did a good job of bleeding the clock out and putting themselves in a favorable position. We didn't get enough yards to play it out there at the end of the half," Moore told CBS Sports sideline reporter Tiffany Blackmon before heading to the locker room.
Either this was a rookie coach making a miscalculation, or it was a polite way of saying he didn't trust Spencer Rattler to lead a final-minute drive without turning the ball over. Rattler already got bailed out once in this game with a defensive penalty wiping out an interception. He threw more interceptions than touchdowns last season, too. With the Saints having won the opening coin toss and elected to receive the kick in the second half, this gives them some control over the situation in a one-score game. But it would've been nice to have a real shot at tying it up to play for the win rather than the tie in the third quarter.
This article origina
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
I posted this previously in the thread: https://x.com/bburkeESPN/status/1964897383541768469
And yes, there are a lot of things that average probabilities don't take into account. They also didn't take into account that Baltimore's D had been on the field for nearly the entire fourth quarter, and had already given up 200+ yards and 3 TDs to Allen in that quarter alone. But what they do tell us is the average, and if the average says that going for it increases your WP% by 8 points, that's a pretty strong presumption that needs to be overcome.
But again, if you don't buy the mathematical argument, feel free to look at it logically and decide if it's smarter to bet on Lamar and Henry gaining two yards or a gassed defense stopping Allen
Last edited:
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Perhaps. Buffalo would have realized pretty quickly what was going on and gotten back to the line and spiked it to the kill the clock (unless the Ravens call TO first).
Situationally, the defense should have been coached to let the Bills score if someone got loose the way Coleman did. Tackling him instead the 10 with 35-40 second left was the wrong move. It is possible he goes down at the 1, but there was still no reason to tackle him in that situation. The Ravens botch situational football waaaay too much under Harbaugh the last few years.
Deamon
Footballguy
When you add in that your QB is cramping and probably wouldn't be very mobile on the next play, basically even.
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
Not to disparage Coleman, but something tells me the odds of him going down at the 1 were minimal. I get why the defender's instinct would be to tackle him, especially when he was still that far from the end zone, but yeah, the message in the huddle should have been "Once they get past a certain yard marker, let them score."
Also, someone remind me when Baltimore used its first timeout. I remember thinking in the moment that it was a weird place to call one, but it didn't seem like it would matter. As it turned out, not having the third one was huge
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
But the Bills didn't know that. And the Ravens had timeouts. Take one of them and see if Lamar can shake the cramps, and if not, he can take the snap from the shotgun and pass. The threat of the run would still scare the Bills defense (since they didn't know he was cramping).
Deamon
Footballguy
Sure, but we don't know how bad his cramps were. Leg cramps can be a *****.
There's all sorts of outcomes here. Should he maybe have taken a timeout and given Lamar an IV? Or came out to try to get them to jump offsides first? Or had Lamar in shotgun? Sure.
My point is it's closer of a call than to be outraged by it. I probably would have gone for it too but it's close.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Yeah, I am not outraged by it, but it just felt like coaching not to win. Cramps can definitely be a *****, so that variable is certainly a factor.
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
I hadn't heard about the cramps. Did Harbaugh cite that as a factor?
Anyway, I'm not outraged either. I'm actually not even sure it was the worst 4th-down decision of the day (that would be McDonald kicking the FG on 4th and inches from the 19 with three minutes left.) I was mostly just objecting to the idea that you should make decisions based solely on the downside risk as opposed to the full range of probabilities
I’m not an analytic genius but my first and only thought was they have to go for it. We know how this ends when you give the ball back to elite QB’s. Even if I had to put my back up in I would go for it. You could see the looks on the players on the Raven bench. They knew it was game over. I wonder if this has a psychological effect on the defensive players. They probably think the game is over.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Reportedly yes, that factored into his decision.
That said, they have a dude named Henry who i’d be willing to bet on getting 2 yards to win the game 99/100x.
I thought they blew it not going for it.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Agree with this statement.
FarFromHome
Footballguy
Especially when the longest he hit pregame was 59 yards. Ha ha
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
Came here to post that. That was absolutely unbelievable. Didn't have a stake in the game but I was almost mad that Steichen's idiocy got bailed out that way
GreenNGold
Footballguy
Down 2 scores with 9 minutes to go in the 4th quarter, the vikings punted on 4th & 1.
rockaction
Footballguy
And right before that, they were also down 15-6 and had run both on first down and then run again on second down to make it third and one before they had McCarthy throw an incomplete pass. There was no urgency with eleven minutes left down two scores and it just didn't seem like there was anything going on tonight but developing a QB, which is absolutely fine and understandable, but I think is 180 degrees away from what the Minnesota fandom wants or expects.
The kid is a rookie who has never played before, and he didn't play well last week until it clicked. And Atlanta has a first-round and a few second-round pass rushers that people have been saying are lights out—and last game he faced Dennis Allen on the road (don't mention Detroit)—so this is all understandable, but I think the fans thought they were going to get something different because they're both used to good football and Midwestern pluck and drive and feel like it should just be! But ask a Jets fan like me and we'll tell you that the **** is difficult and the stuff that looks easy can get awfully difficult really quickly.
So I think if you think about the immediate game at hand, then the play calling and decisions are frustrating. If you're developing a QB they're perfectly understandable and it depends how you choose to look at it.
Similar threads
