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

[Instinctive]

I'll just add in 3 years of coaching division one college basketball at a power 5 school, we mentioned the word "momentum" zero times in any gameplanning, locker room meeting, post game analysis, halftime analysis, pep talk, or practice.

Take that for whatever you find it to be worth I suppose.

 

[Stoneworker]

If momentum has no predictive power in sports, then the entire $100 billion sports betting industry is a crock

Why did betting odds change drastically during the last day of the recent Ryder Cup?

Only one reason: positive momentum built by the U.S. team and the resulting pressure-related psychological impacts on the performance of all the golfing participants

Nothing tangible whatsoever about the course changed; the players' skills didn't change; the weather didn't change; the pin positions didn't change; the matchups didn't change.

And yet as the U.S. gained momentum and mounted their comeback, thousands of sports bettors (including professionals) were increasingly predicting that the U.S. might win

Momentum during a sporting event affected thousands of financial decisions by sports bettors attempting to predict an outcome. It's not a huge leap to suggest momentum can also play a role in humans making coaching decisions that are attempting to create that outcome.

 

[Instinctive]

If momentum has no predictive power in sports, then the entire $100 billion sports betting industry is a crock

Why did betting odds change drastically during the last day of the recent Ryder Cup?

Only one reason: positive momentum built by the U.S. team and the resulting pressure-related psychological impacts on the performance of all the golfing participants

Nothing tangible whatsoever about the course changed; the players' skills didn't change; the weather didn't change; the pin positions didn't change; the matchups didn't change.

And yet as the U.S. gained momentum and mounted their comeback, thousands of sports bettors (including professionals) were increasingly predicting that the U.S. might win

Momentum during a sporting event affected thousands of financial decisions by sports bettors attempting to predict an outcome. It's not a huge leap to suggest momentum can also play a role in humans making coaching decisions that are attempting to create that outcome.

Was it positive momentum or was it better performance?

We'rent the US odds improving because they literally were closer to winning?

Did momentum affect any decisions or was it just obvious that as the score got closer, if you thought the US team was better to begin with and had just been unlucky for a couple days, you'd assume regression to the mean?

This is my point again. Momentum is ONLY a descriptor of previous events.

Or are you saying "momentum made it so clear they would win, but somehow this incredible power was overcome and reversed by the other team"?

That's why it is so silly. It's just another fallacy. It's a pure storytelling device. It's post hoc. It's adjectival.


ETA: and if you believe in the psychological effect on people, are you saying it only makes the team that's ahead play worse? So there's no chance you think it makes someone lock in more and increase performance? Like if France is coming back on the US everybody gets right, and we are just lucky Steph made some threes? Or did the momentum create pressure that makes Steph shoot better? So was it good that France had momentum or bad?

Again, illustrative of my point. It's not predictive. It's not intelligent to use it to evaluate a decision.

 

[Stoneworker]

If momentum has no predictive power in sports, then the entire $100 billion sports betting industry is a crock

Why did betting odds change drastically during the last day of the recent Ryder Cup?

Only one reason: positive momentum built by the U.S. team and the resulting pressure-related psychological impacts on the performance of all the golfing participants

Nothing tangible whatsoever about the course changed; the players' skills didn't change; the weather didn't change; the pin positions didn't change; the matchups didn't change.

And yet as the U.S. gained momentum and mounted their comeback, thousands of sports bettors (including professionals) were increasingly predicting that the U.S. might win

Momentum during a sporting event affected thousands of financial decisions by sports bettors attempting to predict an outcome. It's not a huge leap to suggest momentum can also play a role in humans making coaching decisions that are attempting to create that outcome.

Was it positive momentum or was it better performance?

We'rent the US odds improving because they literally were closer to winning?

Did momentum affect any decisions or was it just obvious that as the score got closer, if you thought the US team was better to begin with and had just been unlucky for a couple days, you'd assume regression to the mean?

This is my point again. Momentum is ONLY a descriptor of previous events.

Or are you saying "momentum made it so clear they would win, but somehow this incredible power was overcome and reversed by the other team"?

That's why it is so silly. It's just another fallacy. It's a pure storytelling device. It's post hoc. It's adjectival.


ETA: and if you believe in the psychological effect on people, are you saying it only makes the team that's ahead play worse? So there's no chance you think it makes someone lock in more and increase performance? Like if France is coming back on the US everybody gets right, and we are just lucky Steph made some threes? Or did the momentum create pressure that makes Steph shoot better? So was it good that France had momentum or bad?

Again, illustrative of my point. It's not predictive. It's not intelligent to use it to evaluate a decision.

Direct quote from a Super Bowl-winning and likely HoF coach who evidently is "silly" and "not intelligent" because he factors momentum into his decision-making...

Sean Payton's explanation as to why he decided to go for one instead of two [after the week 2 Chargers' game]: "We knew a tie, though, was for us just as beneficial as a win. We felt like we had the momentum at that point."

 

[Instinctive]

If momentum has no predictive power in sports, then the entire $100 billion sports betting industry is a crock

Why did betting odds change drastically during the last day of the recent Ryder Cup?

Only one reason: positive momentum built by the U.S. team and the resulting pressure-related psychological impacts on the performance of all the golfing participants

Nothing tangible whatsoever about the course changed; the players' skills didn't change; the weather didn't change; the pin positions didn't change; the matchups didn't change.

And yet as the U.S. gained momentum and mounted their comeback, thousands of sports bettors (including professionals) were increasingly predicting that the U.S. might win

Momentum during a sporting event affected thousands of financial decisions by sports bettors attempting to predict an outcome. It's not a huge leap to suggest momentum can also play a role in humans making coaching decisions that are attempting to create that outcome.

Was it positive momentum or was it better performance?

We'rent the US odds improving because they literally were closer to winning?

Did momentum affect any decisions or was it just obvious that as the score got closer, if you thought the US team was better to begin with and had just been unlucky for a couple days, you'd assume regression to the mean?

This is my point again. Momentum is ONLY a descriptor of previous events.

Or are you saying "momentum made it so clear they would win, but somehow this incredible power was overcome and reversed by the other team"?

That's why it is so silly. It's just another fallacy. It's a pure storytelling device. It's post hoc. It's adjectival.


ETA: and if you believe in the psychological effect on people, are you saying it only makes the team that's ahead play worse? So there's no chance you think it makes someone lock in more and increase performance? Like if France is coming back on the US everybody gets right, and we are just lucky Steph made some threes? Or did the momentum create pressure that makes Steph shoot better? So was it good that France had momentum or bad?

Again, illustrative of my point. It's not predictive. It's not intelligent to use it to evaluate a decision.

Direct quote from a Super Bowl-winning and likely HoF coach who evidently is "silly" and "not intelligent" because he factors momentum into his decision-making...

Sean Payton's explanation as to why he decided to go for one instead of two [after the week 2 Chargers' game]: "We knew a tie, though, was for us just as beneficial as a win. We felt like we had the momentum at that point."

You're confusing somebody saying something was true with whether it actually impacted the decision.

You're confusing whether just because somebody is good at something that they must be right about everything.

You're also confusing an ACTION being silly or a DECISION PROCESS being unintelligent with a person being those things. Somebody can believe in ghosts and be wildly intelligent. It doesn't mean believing in ghosts isn't silly. Plenty of people in here are plenty smart and successful and awesome, and yet I think acting like momentum has future looking impact that you can understand is silly.

I don't know if you're intentionally confusing those things or don't understand, but it should be pointed out regardless.

ETA do you want to address any of the substantive points? Are all people with momentum better? Are the people without momentum worse at all times?

 

[SayWhat?]

This thread is quickly losing momentum.

 

[Stoneworker]

You're confusing somebody saying something was true with whether it actually impacted the decision.

You're confusing whether just because somebody is good at something that they must be right about everything.

You're also confusing an ACTION being silly or a DECISION PROCESS being unintelligent with a person being those things. Somebody can believe in ghosts and be wildly intelligent. It doesn't mean believing in ghosts isn't silly. Plenty of people in here are plenty smart and successful and awesome, and yet I think acting like momentum has future looking impact that you can understand is silly.

I don't know if you're intentionally confusing those things or don't understand, but it should be pointed out regardless.

ETA do you want to address any of the substantive points? Are all people with momentum better? Are the people without momentum worse at all times?

Meh. I'm not going to take the bait and respond to your insulting tone. Take it up with Google AI and its associated research links. They aren't confusing in the least.

Query: Does momentum affect coaching decisions?

AI Overview

Yes, momentum significantly affects coaching decisions as it influences perceived team performance and leads coaches to favor certain strategic choices over others, such as maintaining or changing team organization or employing tactics to shift the game's flow.

A positive momentum can lead coaches to make fewer changes ("stick" choices), while negative momentum often triggers more proactive decisions ("switch" choices) like substitutions, timeouts, or technical fouls to reverse the situation.

Tactics Used by Coaches to Influence Momentum

Coaches use various tools to either build positive momentum or reverse negative momentum:

• Player Substitutions:
  Replacing players can change the team's energy and tactical approach.
  
  
• Timeouts:
  A strategic pause can disrupt the opponent's flow and allow a team to regroup and reassess.
  
  
• Tactical Adjustments:
  Modifying offensive or defensive schemes can surprise the opponent and shift the game's dynamics.
  
  
• Technical Fouls:
  Although risky, some coaches view technical fouls as a way to "stop the game," change the emotional state of the team, or even influence referees, though the effectiveness is debated.

Key Takeaway:

Momentum is not just a subjective feeling; it's a psychological and strategic force that directly impacts coaches' decision-making processes. Coaches often use specific tactics to manage and influence momentum, recognizing its power to affect game outcomes.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

I disagree with, not a specific coaching decision, but the amount of space devoted to arguing about momentum.

 

[Instinctive]

You're confusing somebody saying something was true with whether it actually impacted the decision.

You're confusing whether just because somebody is good at something that they must be right about everything.

You're also confusing an ACTION being silly or a DECISION PROCESS being unintelligent with a person being those things. Somebody can believe in ghosts and be wildly intelligent. It doesn't mean believing in ghosts isn't silly. Plenty of people in here are plenty smart and successful and awesome, and yet I think acting like momentum has future looking impact that you can understand is silly.

I don't know if you're intentionally confusing those things or don't understand, but it should be pointed out regardless.

ETA do you want to address any of the substantive points? Are all people with momentum better? Are the people without momentum worse at all times?

Meh. I'm not going to take the bait and respond to your insulting tone. Take it up with Google AI and its associated research links. They aren't confusing in the least.

Query: Does momentum affect coaching decisions?

AI Overview

Yes, momentum significantly affects coaching decisions as it influences perceived team performance and leads coaches to favor certain strategic choices over others, such as maintaining or changing team organization or employing tactics to shift the game's flow.

A positive momentum can lead coaches to make fewer changes ("stick" choices), while negative momentum often triggers more proactive decisions ("switch" choices) like substitutions, timeouts, or technical fouls to reverse the situation.

Tactics Used by Coaches to Influence Momentum

Coaches use various tools to either build positive momentum or reverse negative momentum:

• Player Substitutions:
  Replacing players can change the team's energy and tactical approach.
  
  
• Timeouts:
  A strategic pause can disrupt the opponent's flow and allow a team to regroup and reassess.
  
  
• Tactical Adjustments:
  Modifying offensive or defensive schemes can surprise the opponent and shift the game's dynamics.
  
  
• Technical Fouls:
  Although risky, some coaches view technical fouls as a way to "stop the game," change the emotional state of the team, or even influence referees, though the effectiveness is debated.

Key Takeaway:

Momentum is not just a subjective feeling; it's a psychological and strategic force that directly impacts coaches' decision-making processes. Coaches often use specific tactics to manage and influence momentum, recognizing its power to affect game outcomes.

Sounds good. I sorry you felt insulted. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings, or push you to resort to the least useful way to use AI either. As the person who knows my intent, there was no bait, just a genuine question as to why any substantive response was totally avoided.

 

[zed2283]

I didn't read the whole sub discussion, but my guess from what I did read is that the participants are possibly defining momentum differently.

 

[Instinctive]

I didn't read the whole sub discussion, but my guess from what I did read is that the participants are possibly defining momentum differently.

Yes. So let's define it! Is it even possible to define in a way that you can call out in the moment and quantify? The entire issue with it is that it's entirely backwards looking.

When does it start? One score? Two in a row? A score and a turnover? 3 scores?

Can you only get momentum if you were losing by a lot and score multiple times in a row?

 

[Pip's Invitation]

I didn't read the whole sub discussion, but my guess from what I did read is that the participants are possibly defining momentum differently.

Yes. So let's define it! Is it even possible to define in a way that you can call out in the moment and quantify? The entire issue with it is that it's entirely backwards looking.

When does it start? One score? Two in a row? A score and a turnover? 3 scores?

Can you only get momentum if you were losing by a lot and score multiple times in a row?

Let’s not. Why don’t you guys who are hung up on this discussion start a new thread, and leave this one to coaching decisions?

 

[Instinctive]

I didn't read the whole sub discussion, but my guess from what I did read is that the participants are possibly defining momentum differently.

Yes. So let's define it! Is it even possible to define in a way that you can call out in the moment and quantify? The entire issue with it is that it's entirely backwards looking.

When does it start? One score? Two in a row? A score and a turnover? 3 scores?

Can you only get momentum if you were losing by a lot and score multiple times in a row?

Let’s not. Why don’t you guys who are hung up on this discussion start a new thread, and leave this one to coaching decisions?

Fine. I won't post on momentum again unless anything specifically addresses it/me.

It's weird that you don't want to talk about a thing that might affect coaches decisions you disagree with in the thread about coaching decisions in my opinion. Would love to know why.

Especially when the thread will pretty much be dead until this afternoon, then dead again Tuesday to Saturday.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

End of first half. Chiefs have 4th and long with a minute and a half left. Jags have one timeout. Liam Cohen chooses to save it and lets the Chiefs run the clock down below a minute before they punt.

Why wouldn’t you use the timeout there? You can use those 30 seconds much more effectively if you’re controlling the clock on offense

 

[Ghost Rider]

I don't know if this was discussed in the game thread or not, but Daboll and Kafka should have their brains examined. Dart gets knocked on his *** and tested for a concussion, and when he comes back into the game, what they do they call? Two designed runs for Dart on the first two plays, both of which saw him get hit pretty hard again. I get it, it's football and you can't coach scared, but maybe don't call a designed run for your QB on the first two plays after he had to leave the game for a spell because he might have had a concussion.

 

[zed2283]

I don't know if this was discussed in the game thread or not, but Daboll and Kafka should have their brains examined. Dart gets knocked on his *** and tested for a concussion, and when he comes back into the game, what they do they call? Two designed runs for Dart on the first two plays, both of which saw him get hit pretty hard again. I get it, it's football and you can't coach scared, but maybe don't call a designed run for your QB on the first two plays after he had to leave the game for a spell because he might have had a concussion.

I was pretty confused by all the crazy blue tent activity and Daboll yelling at people and walking to the tent, etc. I don't recall ever seeing anything like that.

 

[smbkrypt24]

I don't know if this was discussed in the game thread or not, but Daboll and Kafka should have their brains examined. Dart gets knocked on his *** and tested for a concussion, and when he comes back into the game, what they do they call? Two designed runs for Dart on the first two plays, both of which saw him get hit pretty hard again. I get it, it's football and you can't coach scared, but maybe don't call a designed run for your QB on the first two plays after he had to leave the game for a spell because he might have had a concussion.

I was pretty confused by all the crazy blue tent activity and Daboll yelling at people and walking to the tent, etc. I don't recall ever seeing anything like that.

At the very least the appearance of Daboll going to the tent and then yelling at the doctor isn’t a good look. Daboll can say he respects the concussion process all he wants, but the reality is when you do both of those things you are not letting that process play out how it is supposed to.

 

[zed2283]

Jets at midfield on 4th down with time in the first half running out. Instead of calling a timeout and taking one hail mary shot to end the half, they just let the clock run out.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

Jets at midfield on 4th down with time in the first half running out. Instead of calling a timeout and taking one hail mary shot to end the half, they just let the clock run out.

They had no timeouts left. But they had plenty of time to run a Hail Mary play.

 

[zed2283]

Jets at midfield on 4th down with time in the first half running out. Instead of calling a timeout and taking one hail mary shot to end the half, they just let the clock run out.

They had no timeouts left. But they had plenty of time to run a Hail Mary play.

I seem to recall them having one timeout left, but I could be wrong. Either way, as you said, they certainly had enough time to run a play.

 

[wlwiles]

Jets at midfield on 4th down with time in the first half running out. Instead of calling a timeout and taking one hail mary shot to end the half, they just let the clock run out.

They had no timeouts left. But they had plenty of time to run a Hail Mary play.

I seem to recall them having one timeout left, but I could be wrong. Either way, as you said, they certainly had enough time to run a play.

And then went for it on 4th and 8 from the 44 yard line with 1:14 left instead of trying a ~60 yard FG to win it. I don't know if Folk has the range to do it or not, but with how abysmal your offense has been the entire day, I don't know how you have any confidence that you'll pick up the 4th down knowing Denver is going to send a jailbreak blitz at Fields.