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

[Deamon]

absolutely hate when people blast a call simply because it didn't work that time. Would have been PRAISED and worshiped had the ref not screwed up.

That's the thing, the play worked to perfection. The refs created the mess, not the coach.

The worst is when announcers do it. They go for it, it's unsuccessful, and they boast "See Jim, in that situation I think you have to take the points".

How often do you hear an announcer or fan say "He really screwed up that call, you have to kick that FG there" as a team is celebrating in the endzone after a TD? Never. The result shouldn't change how you judge a non-psychic's decision at the time he makes it.

 

[RG623]

I get it’s how Campbell coaches and his players love it/will run through walls for him/yada yada yada, but you can’t still go for 2 following the penalty after the first attempt.

But that didn't affect them, they got the penalty and moved closer.

I absolutely hate when people blast a call simply because it didn't work that time. Would have been PRAISED and worshiped had the ref not screwed up.

I’m not blasting the call on the first try, i had no problem with going for it there. My issue is going for it again at the 7 yard line following the penalty. And even though they got the offsides penalty, it’s still the wrong move IMO.

 

[abrunn1133]

absolutely hate when people blast a call simply because it didn't work that time. Would have been PRAISED and worshiped had the ref not screwed up.

That's the thing, the play worked to perfection. The refs created the mess, not the coach.

The worst is when announcers do it. They go for it, it's unsuccessful, and they boast "See Jim, in that situation I think you have to take the points".

How often do you hear an announcer or fan say "He really screwed up that call, you have to kick that FG there" as a team is celebrating in the endzone after a TD? Never. The result shouldn't change how you judge a non-psychic's decision at the time he makes it.

I could not agree with this any more.

 

[renesauz]

I get it’s how Campbell coaches and his players love it/will run through walls for him/yada yada yada, but you can’t still go for 2 following the penalty after the first attempt.

But that didn't affect them, they got the penalty and moved closer.

I absolutely hate when people blast a call simply because it didn't work that time. Would have been PRAISED and worshiped had the ref not screwed up.

Bad assumption that the play would have still worked, and too much blame on the refs. They apparently announced #70 eligible, and Detroit should have known something was wrong. If Dallas players had known #68 was the eligible, perhaps they would have covered him instead of covering #70. Not saying refs didn't screw something up, I'm saying Detroit did too, and it's a terrible assumption to make to think the play works had refs called the right eligible.

 

[kface]

Yea for me campbell is a terrible coach and he has cost the lions more than he has gained them this year. Yes they won the division but they also barely beat bad teams and half the time if they just took the fg they would be in a more comfortable position

He's gotten so lucky with that cupcake schedule which even he is making look harder than it is

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Here’s my rough math on Campbell’s later-game decisions:

Kick the XP, go to OT: probably like a 48% WP, given that they were on the road

Attempt 2PC from 2: 52% WP

2PC from 7: 40% WP

2PC from 3 1/2: 48% WP

You can quibble with my estimates, but I think the only situation where the numbers clearly argue against going for it was from the 7. But I think Campbell took a calculated risk because he saw other benefits from that attempt, and I have no problem with it

 

[Tau837]

I get it’s how Campbell coaches and his players love it/will run through walls for him/yada yada yada, but you can’t still go for 2 following the penalty after the first attempt.

But that didn't affect them, they got the penalty and moved closer.

I absolutely hate when people blast a call simply because it didn't work that time. Would have been PRAISED and worshiped had the ref not screwed up.

Bad assumption that the play would have still worked, and too much blame on the refs. They apparently announced #70 eligible, and Detroit should have known something was wrong. If Dallas players had known #68 was the eligible, perhaps they would have covered him instead of covering #70. Not saying refs didn't screw something up, I'm saying Detroit did too, and it's a terrible assumption to make to think the play works had refs called the right eligible.

It's true there are no guarantees, but it is clear and obvious the refs did indeed make a mistake. You can see Goff direct #68 to report to the ref, and you can see him do it. #70 did not talk to the ref. Furthermore, Campbell said they talked about the possibility they would run this play with the ref before the game.

Apparently, as a result of this and other mistakes in this game, the NFL has demoted this officiating crew from working the playoffs.

I would have kicked the XP after the penalty and taken it to OT.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I get it’s how Campbell coaches and his players love it/will run through walls for him/yada yada yada, but you can’t still go for 2 following the penalty after the first attempt.

But that didn't affect them, they got the penalty and moved closer.

I absolutely hate when people blast a call simply because it didn't work that time. Would have been PRAISED and worshiped had the ref not screwed up.

Bad assumption that the play would have still worked, and too much blame on the refs. They apparently announced #70 eligible, and Detroit should have known something was wrong. If Dallas players had known #68 was the eligible, perhaps they would have covered him instead of covering #70. Not saying refs didn't screw something up, I'm saying Detroit did too, and it's a terrible assumption to make to think the play works had refs called the right eligible.

It's true there are no guarantees, but it is clear and obvious the refs did indeed make a mistake. You can see Goff direct #68 to report to the ref, and you can see him do it. #70 did not talk to the ref. Furthermore, Campbell said they talked about the possibility they would run this play with the ref before the game.

Apparently, as a result of this and other mistakes in this game, the NFL has demoted this officiating crew from working the playoffs.

I would have kicked the XP after the penalty and taken it to OT.

https://www.si.com/nfl/cowboys/news/dallas-cowboys-vs-detroit-lions-referees-reveals-punishment-brad-allen-officiating-crew-goofs-dan-campbell

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

College edition.

First of all, Texas (and the Seahawks on Sunday) did something that always drives me bonkers. When driving late and trailing by between 9-11 points, teams think, "We need a TD and a FG, so we have to make sure we get at least one of them on this drive." But the two are not equal! Getting a TD is way more valuable in that situation, particularly when you're down 10 or 11, since you can potentially score a second TD and win the game in regulation. It's one thing if it's 4th and 10 from the 30; in that case, sure, kick the FG. But Seattle kicked on 4th and goal from the 5 down 10, and Texas kicked on 4th and 4 from the 5 down 9. Seattle never got the ball back, but Texas did, and instead of the game coming down to a 4th and 4 from the 5, it came down to 4th and 11 from the 13. If you have 4th and goal, your chances of scoring a TD are about as good as they're going to get on any subsequent drive.

Second, the reason it was 4th and 11 was because on first down, Texas threw a bizarre swing pass to the RB with 15 seconds left; he got pushed out of bounds after a loss of one. If he hadn't made it to the sidelines, the game might have ended right there. But even with him going out, it was a total waste of five seconds in a game where they didn't have much to spare (as it turned out, they barely had enough time to get the 4th down play off)

 

[Gally]

But Seattle kicked on 4th and goal from the 5 down 10, and Texas kicked on 4th and 4 from the 5 down 9. Seattle never got the ball back, but Texas did, and instead of the game coming down to a 4th and 4 from the 5, it came down to 4th and 11 from the 13. If you have 4th and goal, your chances of scoring a TD are about as good as they're going to get on any subsequent drive.

The bigger mistake in the Seattle game was going for an on side kick after kicking the FG. There was 2:01 left on the clock and the Seahawks had two timeouts left. If they kick the ball out of the endzone they would essentially get three clock stoppages and could get the ball back with about 1:45-ish on the clock. Much better chance of that happening than recovering an on-side kick. In addition, by doing the on-side kick they use up the 2 minute warning on the kickoff. Which means that they can only stop the clock twice (two timeouts left) and would get the ball back with well under a minute left if they were able to stop the Steelers in three plays.

It was absolutely terrible idea to try the on-side kick in this situation.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Here’s my rough math on Campbell’s later-game decisions:

Kick the XP, go to OT: probably like a 48% WP, given that they were on the road

Attempt 2PC from 2: 52% WP

2PC from 7: 40% WP

2PC from 3 1/2: 48% WP

You can quibble with my estimates, but I think the only situation where the numbers clearly argue against going for it was from the 7. But I think Campbell took a calculated risk because he saw other benefits from that attempt, and I have no problem with it

Here's what ESPN's data nerd had to say about these percentages.

Our model lightly preferred going for 2 on the first and third Lions attempts. But the WPs on the Lions' second 2-point attempt from the 7-yard line...

WP Kick: 44%
WP Go for 2: 34%

I saw another one that said something similar, except that it had the third attempt as slightly EV-negative. It's not an exact science, obviously.

Clearly Campbell made a suboptimal decision on the second attempt (and worse, I suspect he made it based on emotion). But note that they were underdogs even if they had kicked the XP, so it's silly to say his decision cost them the game

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

OK, I know Taylor was hurting, so I’ll wait until I hear Steichen’s explanation before making a final judgment, but why, with your entire session on the line, were the Colts throwing to your third-string RB who has caught 6 passes all year?

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

The bigger mistake there, by far, was wasting a timeout before the 4th and 1 play. Stunning what a blunder that was.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

https://www.si.com/nfl/2024/01/15/sean-mcvay-clock-mismanagement-rams-lose-lions-divisional-round

 

[ghostguy123]

Bill end of first half throwing over and over up 21-0 heading to half was dumb

 

[Snoopy]

Steelers not calling timeouts before halftime with the Bills punter injured.

 

[CalBear]

Detroit-Rams. 1-point game, Detroit has the ball, 1st and 10 on their own 32 with 2:38 to go. Rams have 1 TO. Montgomery runs for 1 yard. Rams don't call the timeout, clock winds down to 2:00.

This one should be a gimme; there is no scenario where allowing 30+ seconds to run off the clock prior to the 2-minute warning is the correct call. You're costing yourself at least the time it takes to run one play after the 2-minute warning (which would have been run before the 2-minute warning, otherwise).

In the actual game, Goff threw a completion to St. Brown on second and 9 to get the first down. On third and 12, Goff knelt down at 0:39, ending the game. If McVay had called the timeout before the 2-minute warning, Goff would have been kneeling down at 0:45, and Detroit might have had to run a fourth down play or punt.

Even more so, if the pass to St. Brown had been incomplete, taking the TO would have had Detroit at third and 9 with 2:30 left, vs. third and 9 with 1:55 left and the Rams having a timeout. A lot more pressure on the Lions' third-down play in that situation; another incompletion and you're punting back to them with still more than 2:00 on the clock.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Detroit-Rams. 1-point game, Detroit has the ball, 1st and 10 on their own 32 with 2:38 to go. Rams have 1 TO. Montgomery runs for 1 yard. Rams don't call the timeout, clock winds down to 2:00.

This one should be a gimme; there is no scenario where allowing 30+ seconds to run off the clock prior to the 2-minute warning is the correct call. You're costing yourself at least the time it takes to run one play after the 2-minute warning (which would have been run before the 2-minute warning, otherwise).

In the actual game, Goff threw a completion to St. Brown on second and 9 to get the first down. On third and 12, Goff knelt down at 0:39, ending the game. If McVay had called the timeout before the 2-minute warning, Goff would have been kneeling down at 0:45, and Detroit might have had to run a fourth down play or punt.

Even more so, if the pass to St. Brown had been incomplete, taking the TO would have had Detroit at third and 9 with 2:30 left, vs. third and 9 with 1:55 left and the Rams having a timeout. A lot more pressure on the Lions' third-down play in that situation; another incompletion and you're punting back to them with still more than 2:00 on the clock.

Yes to all that, but more simply, it seems pretty obvious that you use your timeouts in situations where you know the clock is running down as opposed to future plays where you don't know what will happen. We saw a couple weeks ago with Dallas (or with Buffalo in the KC game a few weeks before that) that sometimes teams will throw incomplete in those situations and stop the clock for you. All the more reason to use a timeout after a running play

 

[Gally]

In the actual game, Goff threw a completion to St. Brown on second and 9 to get the first down.

I wonder if the Rams had used their TO pre-warning would the Lions have passed on 2nd down? I think they almost would have had to run to ensure the clock got to the 2 minute warning which likely would have put them in a 3rd and long situation which also would have helped the Rams.

 

[abrunn1133]

How about every time Matt LaFleur throws the challenge flag?

 

[dickey moe]

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

 

[Leroy Hoard]

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

Bad coaching decisions that create bad coaching decisions.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

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.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I take serious issue with Shanny’s end of half time management.

1:30+ on the clock

They let 30 seconds burn off playing for a FG in the rain & wind, which was blocked. They come away with nothing.

Take a couple shots to the end zone. Go for the TD there & out the pack down 14-6 at the half. At least *try*. The lack of aggression damn near cost them the game.

 

[Dizzy]

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.

Fully agree, except that nobody - including the Packers - found out they were "contenders" until last weekend.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

I take serious issue with Shanny’s end of half time management.

1:30+ on the clock

They let 30 seconds burn off playing for a FG in the rain & win, which was blocked. They come away with nothing.

Take a couple shots to the end zone. Go for the TD there & out the pack down 14-6 at the half. At least *try*. The lack of aggression damn near cost them the game.

McVay: I’m on a one-man mission to prove you can be a genius play caller and terrible game manager.

Shanny: Son, let me show you how it’s done!

He coached like he was more worried about what GB would do on their subsequent drive than he was in scoring on his own.

By the way, that’s the same reason I disagreed with the announcers criticizing GB’s clock management on the Niners’ final drive. As with Belichick on the Butler INT, you don’t concede a game-winning score in that situation, you try to stop them from going ahead. (Obviously, it’s different if you’re only up by one or two, because then they will run the clock down and kick the chip-shot FG). In any event, GB got the ball back with 1:10 and all of their TOs, so they had plenty of time to engineer a scoring drive to tie or win the game

 

[efactor]

By the way, that’s the same reason I disagreed with the announcers criticizing GB’s clock management on the Niners’ final drive. As with Belichick on the Butler INT, you don’t concede a game-winning score in that situation, you try to stop them from going ahead. (Obviously, it’s different if you’re only up by one or two, because then they will run the clock down and kick the chip-shot FG). In any event, GB got the ball back with 1:10 and all of their TOs, so they had plenty of time to engineer a scoring drive to tie or win the game

Disagree here. I think having less time on the clock played into Love having a greater sense of urgency and he made a hero ball throw to end the game. Nobody saying (that I saw anyway) that they should concede the score. That’s crazy talk but save as much time as possible in case they do score. I was irritated at CMC when he ran out of bounds on the first down catch for no gain. Thought he should have slid down when he saw there was no yardage to be made. Time was not an issue for SF and that gave GB more time for the last drive.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Disagree here. I think having less time on the clock played into Love having a greater sense of urgency and he made a hero ball throw to end the game.

I agree with that.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

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…..

 

[Snoopy]

Campbell not challenging a non-sack call.

 

[GreenNGold]

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…..

Yes, I'm guessing they still wish they had Mason Crosby right now.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

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

 

[IHEARTFF]

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

Yeah didn’t love that call

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

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

Yeah didn’t love that call

At this point, when a Chiefs WR makes a boneheaded play that's all on Reid. He knows what he's dealing with

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

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.

It's amazing how many teams go cheap at kicker and end up losing important games by a few points. Then again, many fantasy teams do the same thing, selecting whatever kicker is around at the end, losing games by a point or two, and then missing the playoffs by a game.

 

[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.

It's amazing how many teams go cheap at kicker and end up losing important games by a few points. Then again, many fantasy teams do the same thing, selecting whatever kicker is around at the end, losing games by a point or two, and then missing the playoffs by a game.

Rams were even worse than the Packers. They cut their kicker before the final week of the season and went into the playoffs with Brett Maher, whose claim to fame is that he had a complete meltdown with the Cowboys in last year's playoffs. (Fortunately for LA, Maher hit all his chip shots against the Lions and wasn't the reason they lost).

Then again, Buffalo had a veteran kicker who has been in big moments before, and he honked the potential game-tying FG. Such is the life of a kicker

 

[zed2283]

Somebody going for 2 yesterday to go down by 8.

 

[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

 

[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

 

[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??

 

[Gally]

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.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Maybe Bowles gets a contract bonus for the number of timeouts he didn't use on the year.

Unused timeouts can be exchanged for a free side of mozzarella sticks at participating Beef O'Bradys in the Greater Tampa Area

 

[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.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

The Lions made a mistake, Tampa just plain gave up.

 

[Jayrod]

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.

 

[Steeler]

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

When I saw this thread was bumped I knew it was going to be due to this... which was absolutely the right call by Bowles.

 

[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.

 

[rockaction]

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.

I just vented about this in another thread. He quit on his team. The coach. I'd fire him immediately. That was their season. He owes it to those guys to use the TO.

Awful.

Todd Bowles in a nutshell.

 

[Cjw_55106]

The Lions made a mistake, Tampa just plain gave up.

Lions were dumb, Tampa said Hold my beer.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

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.