Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Post here when coaches do something you disagree with


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

I didn't mind the call in real time since the most likely outcome of punting is only gaining 23 yards of field position, although with as bad as the Giants offense had looked through 2-1/2 games to that point I wouldn't have been bothered by a punt either.

But if you're gonna make that call you absolutely have to ensure Wentz knows to just throw the ball deep up for grabs if he's in any danger of getting sacked. If you aren't 100% sure you and he are on the same page in that regard, just punt it away. It's that I question Doug on more than the call.

That I can agree on. And we honestly will never know that unless he or Wentz just came out and said it. I chalk it up to a great young QB still is a young QB. He makes mistakes and that one just came at a bad time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

I'd have bought that argument 25, 15, maybe even 5 years ago. Nowadays, that's no excuse. If the team staff can review six different video angles of a play, come to consensus, and communicate to the HC whether to throw a challenge flag in the time it takes for the other team to hustle to the line and snap the ball, they can sure as hell have a guy plug down, distance, and yard line into an R program (or even an app) and have it spit out a probability and a recommendation in less.

Yeah, plus a lot of the stuff we talk about here isn't a matter of some Nerdlinger typing a bunch of numbers into the Bat Computer and having it spit out an answer. It's more about recognizing cognitive biases that lead to sub-optimal decision making. Rather than having Poindexter in the booth, you need to have him meet with the coaching staff at the beginning of the season and explain to them why they should go for it on fourth down more frequently (and yes, I'm sure it would take much more than that to get them to change their thinking).

Edited by zftcg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Insein said:

This is an interesting argument because Doug Pederson is getting skewered for this very situation this week. 4th and 8 on the Giants 43 with less than 3 minutes in the half to go. Eagles only up 7-0. Doug mentioned that his analytics guy said the odds favored going for it. The result of the play is what he's getting killed for though. Wentz took a sack back at the Eagles 48. Had he done anything else (gained 1-7 yds, thrown a pick, incomplete) it wouldn't have been as bad. The reward being that if his offense (who was moving up and down just not scoring) could gain 8 yards, they keep it for the rest of the half and almost assuredly score at least 3 points if not more.

It's on the outside range of the risk reward curve but I think it was good calculated risk to get more points and keep the ball away from the opponent.

We shouldn't overrate this as a factor for why coaches are so conservative. If Pederson does the "safe" thing and punts, he's far less likely to get criticized by the media. Also, people focus on results, not process. 

What's dumb is that this is short-term thinking. You know what gets you killed in the press? Losing. You know the best way not to lose? Make decisions that maximize your likelihood of winning. And you know what gets you the best results from those decisions? Having a good process to make them.

Edited by zftcg
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dick Vermeil Retired A Decade Ago. Will You Please Stop Using His Damn 2-Point Conversion Chart?

Quote

The logic is pretty simple: If you can estimate your team’s chances of winning with an X point lead/deficit (X points being how many points you are up or down following a touchdown) and your chances of winning with X+1 and X+2, the decision follows from simple arithmetic. In fact, given that 2-point attempts and extra-point attempts taken from the 15-yard line (under the new rules implemented in 2015) now have roughly the same expected point value (both around 0.95 points), the choice is easier than ever. Simply calculate (or estimate):

  • The improvement in win percentage if your point margin changed from X to X+1.
  • The improvement in win percentage if your point margin changed from X+1 to X+2.

If the first number is greater, kick the extra point. If the second is, go for 2.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/26/2017 at 10:39 AM, zftcg said:

We shouldn't overrate this as a factor for why coaches are so conservative. If Pederson does the "safe" thing and punts, he's far less likely to get criticized by the media. Also, people focus on results, not process. 

Here's an analysis of why Doug did it

https://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2017/9/25/16360840/why-doug-pederson-went-for-it-on-4th-and-8-philadelphia-eagles-win-probability

Frankly I think this is where it's dangerous to put numbers in the hands of someone who isn't mathematically inclined. Doug wanted to go for it (it is his natural inclination) and was given numbers to verify his position. An 85% win probability is high and should be preserved. Donnie Jones is a great punter. The defense is playing better than the offense and should be trusted more. They were in a position to maintain win probability not maximize it. The Giants were struggling and 50 yards for a FG attempt (punt) is more daunting for them than 20 yards (incompletion).

Fortunately for the Eagles, the Giants were the Giants and just missed out on a TD to end the half 3 times (3 times!!!). Doug surrendered momentum for no good reason, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.espn.com/espn/now?nowId=21-40003844-4

Quote

The biggest 4th down error Sunday afternoon was by far the decision by Jacksonville to punt in sudden death from the Jets' 43 yard line with just 3 yard to go. It cost them 5.7% of win probability on the decision alone. The Jaguars needed a 37% chance of converting to make the gamble worthwhile, and the typical success rate is over 49% in that situation.

Brian Burke, ESPN Analytics

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, zftcg said:

That wasn't even the dumbest thing they did. Down 3 with a little over a minute left in regulation, 1st and goal from 6 and they don't run Fournette once. Incomplete,  2 yard reception, incomplete. FG

They had 3 timeouts,. Run the ball  first and/or second down to kill clock.

Edited by JaxBill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, JaxBill said:

That wasn't even the dumbest thing they did. Down 3 with a little over a minute left in regulation, 1st and goal from 6 and they don't run Fournette once. Incomplete,  2 yard reception, incomplete. FG

They had 3 timeouts,. Run the ball  first and/or second down to kill clock.

Par for the course with Marrone.  There's a reason every Bills fan was happy when he left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/26/2017 at 6:56 AM, davearm said:

I think we're neglecting to recognize how quickly most of these decisions need to be made, with a playclock running down, personnel groupings to be sent into the game, playcall to be made and sent into the huddle, etc.

In theory it seems to make sense to have some dude with the title "win probability maximizer" sitting in the press box advising the HC, but in practice I'm not sure that guidance can effectively be communicated in real time.

Many of the decisions can be made a play or more in advance. The guy in the booth doesn't need to wait until it's 4th & 3 on the opponent's 40 before running the numbers. When it's 3rd & 7 from the 44 he can run the numbers and decide "if we get it down to 4th and 4 or less then we should go for it; otherwise punt." Actually, he should be able to run the numbers on 1st & 10 from the 47 and get it all communicated before they call their 2nd down play (except perhaps at the very end of the half, when the 4th down decision depends on how much time the first 3 downs took).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pretty much everything McaDont does every week..

but the cake goes to Adam Gase..what a buffoon. yheres a 39 minute official timeout over a silly thing that shouldnt have even been reviewed and what does Gase do?? calls timeout when the refs start play again..U coulve had 3 beers and half a cigar during that official timeout and that bonehead calls timeout when it ends. why? WHY?? 

and he has a battering ram RB but he keeps him under wraps...wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, rickyg said:

Adam gase's call on 1st & goal to throw a fade to has been Julius thomas with one of the most mistake prone qbs in the history of football when you have jay ajayi in your backfield.   

Stupid is as stupid does.  

I remember back in the '90s, the Lions used to run the fade to Herman Moore all the time and it was considered unstoppable. That time seems to have passed, especially with Megatron's retirement. Who's left who can pull it off? Crabtree? Dez?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
7 minutes ago, BobbyLayne said:

Cleveland had the ball on the 2 yard line with 19 seconds left, no timeouts

  • pass to Njoku incomplete, couldn't get his second foot down
  • QB sneak. FROM THE TWO. Clock ran out.

Hue Jackson is 1-23 in the last 1-1/2 years

Was that Jackson's call or did Kizer do that on his own?  Will be interesting to hear the postgame presser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Faust said:

That was a bad call by Fox, but it really is a dumb rule. If the ball goes out at the 1-inch line, they retain possession at the spot of the fumble. So why is that logic thrown out the window if the ball is fumbled just 1 inch away? What's so important about fumbling into the endzone that justifies a loss of possession?

If you're going to insist on calling it a "touchback", then make it a touchback for the offense. Give them the ball back at the 20.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if this is worthy ...

but Cowboys coach, Leif Garrett was forced to start his backup left tackle last night due to injury.

Backup LT was beat to the outside over and over and over and over again. Garrett leaves him on an island even after the LT has given up 3, 4, 5, 6 sacks.

No TE help, no RB help, ... heck, just have the LT line up super wide and force the DE Clayborne to come inside where there is some help.

ATL DE Clayborne finishes with 6 sacks for -32 yards, strip sack fumble and recovery, and 3 tackles for loss. An ATL team record for sacks in a game.

How does Garrett not see this happening? How does someone in the DAL booth upstairs not see this and communicate to Garrett that there is an issue and he might want to adjust?

Garrett stubborn or brain dead? Maybe both.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, [scooter] said:

That was a bad call by Fox, but it really is a dumb rule. If the ball goes out at the 1-inch line, they retain possession at the spot of the fumble. So why is that logic thrown out the window if the ball is fumbled just 1 inch away? What's so important about fumbling into the endzone that justifies a loss of possession?

If you're going to insist on calling it a "touchback", then make it a touchback for the offense. Give them the ball back at the 20.

This. I could see spotting it on the 1, or half the distance to the goal from where the play started, or backing them up to the 20, but loss of possession is just stupid. Sometimes I think about the hypothetical if I was from London and just watching my first football game, which rules would I find most asinine? This is definitely one of them. On that tangent, I am fine with the rule, but if I were new to the sport I'd probably find the 1 knee = 2 feet rule to be pretty odd. The Calvin Johnson rule would be mind boggling. If it looks like a catch, it should be a catch. The Brady tuck rule is similarly odd. If it looks like a fumble, it should be a fumble. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems every time I watch Denver play, McKenzie fumbles a punt. Last night was number 5 on the year.  How can you keep putting him back there?  Last night Denver D gets a 3 and out on first series then McKenzie drops the fair catch attempt and NE has a first down around the Denver 25. 

Seems Joseph might question the special teams coach choice of his return man at some point. If a RB had fumbled 5 times in a small amount of touches, he would likely be benched. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bossman said:

Not sure if this is worthy ...

but Cowboys coach, Leif Garrett was forced to start his backup left tackle last night due to injury.

Backup LT was beat to the outside over and over and over and over again. Garrett leaves him on an island even after the LT has given up 3, 4, 5, 6 sacks.

No TE help, no RB help, ... heck, just have the LT line up super wide and force the DE Clayborne to come inside where there is some help.

ATL DE Clayborne finishes with 6 sacks for -32 yards, strip sack fumble and recovery, and 3 tackles for loss. An ATL team record for sacks in a game.

How does Garrett not see this happening? How does someone in the DAL booth upstairs not see this and communicate to Garrett that there is an issue and he might want to adjust?

Garrett stubborn or brain dead? Maybe both.

 

 

As I have stated many times, these guys are not Harvard grads. A lot of them come and go never to be heard from again because they are inept. I doubt it's brain dead. Just an inability to see what is happening and adjusting. Not just him but the staff, mostly the OL coach. 'um, hey coach, can you give my backup OL a little help? He's getting destroyed"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, efactor said:

Seems every time I watch Denver play, McKenzie fumbles a punt. Last night was number 5 on the year.  How can you keep putting him back there?  Last night Denver D gets a 3 and out on first series then McKenzie drops the fair catch attempt and NE has a first down around the Denver 25. 

Seems Joseph might question the special teams coach choice of his return man at some point. If a RB had fumbled 5 times in a small amount of touches, he would likely be benched. 

If the DEN players had all hope of winning that game squashed when NE scored 7 off that punt fumble.

Not only the muffed punt that NE turned into 7 points 2 plays later ... but they gave up a Kickoff return TD for 7, gave up a blocked punt that NE got another 3 points , ...

and the punt return team had a "12 men on the field" penalty on 4 and 5 that gave NE a 1st down. How does that even happen?? NE gets 7 more on that one.

DEN special teams gave up 24 points by themselves.

Also, Al Michaels pointing out a play where DEN defense gave up a TD while only having 10 players on the field. Seems the DEN coaches may be way over their heads.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lod001 said:

As I have stated many times, these guys are not Harvard grads. A lot of them come and go never to be heard from again because they are inept. I doubt it's brain dead. Just an inability to see what is happening and adjusting. Not just him but the staff, mostly the OL coach. 'um, hey coach, can you give my backup OL a little help? He's getting destroyed"

Garrett went to Princeton.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, lod001 said:

As I have stated many times, these guys are not Harvard grads. A lot of them come and go never to be heard from again because they are inept. I doubt it's brain dead. Just an inability to see what is happening and adjusting. Not just him but the staff, mostly the OL coach. 'um, hey coach, can you give my backup OL a little help? He's getting destroyed"

I agree.

I suggested that an assistant from the DAL booth communicate down to Garrett but OL coach, water boy, cheerleader, mascot, or anyone else ... it needs to come from someone... because Garrett was oblivious and remained oblivious.

Good field generals have good lieutenants that give input that dictates decisions. Either Garrett has none or completely disregarded their input.

Hard to believe DAL went into that game without a plan B if their backup LT was struggling.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Jax staff took stupid up a notch this past week. They had Bortles throwing a 20 yard pass on 3rd down, in FG range to tie the game with 1:48 left. INT. They got lucky to get the ball back with a minute left and tried everything they could to run out of time before kicking the tying FG, getting lucky again with a roughing the passer call. Then in OT, they got an INT in FG rage but decided to dick around with the ball a couple times instead of kicking a 35 yard FG. They ran it for a yard, ran it for a yard, Bortles then loses 2 yards on 3rd down putting the ball on the left hash mark. Risking holding penalties or false starts instead of trotting out and kicking it right away...just to kick for the same spot they were at to begin with. They then were gifted 5 yards by the other teams penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, lod001 said:

The Jax staff took stupid up a notch this past week. They had Bortles throwing a 20 yard pass on 3rd down, in FG range to tie the game with 1:48 left. INT. They got lucky to get the ball back with a minute left and tried everything they could to run out of time before kicking the tying FG, getting lucky again with a roughing the passer call. Then in OT, they got an INT in FG rage but decided to dick around with the ball a couple times instead of kicking a 35 yard FG. They ran it for a yard, ran it for a yard, Bortles then loses 2 yards on 3rd down putting the ball on the left hash mark. Risking holding penalties or false starts instead of trotting out and kicking it right away...just to kick for the same spot they were at to begin with. They then were gifted 5 yards by the other teams penalty.

Jax also had multiple taunting penalties one of which almost cost them the game. Marquise Lee's was especially bad as it took them out of FG range with under two minutes left to play when they needed 3 to tie. Luckily for them they got the ball back again.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Texans trotted out only 10 men for a chip shot FG that would have given them the lead and called a time out on their own kicker. Result of the next play, kicker misses it.


Timeout was the right call there. "Icing" only has a 1% success rate on short field goals. I would think that having only 10 players would result in far more than just 1% differential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, [scooter] said:

That was a bad call by Fox, but it really is a dumb rule. If the ball goes out at the 1-inch line, they retain possession at the spot of the fumble. So why is that logic thrown out the window if the ball is fumbled just 1 inch away? What's so important about fumbling into the endzone that justifies a loss of possession?

If you're going to insist on calling it a "touchback", then make it a touchback for the offense. Give them the ball back at the 20.

If you get tackled on your own 1 inch line, you retain the ball at the spot you were tackled.  Why is that logic thrown out the window if you are tackled just 1 inch away, and now it is a safety and the other team gets the ball AND points?

The endzone changes things, a lot.  That's why.

Edited by FreeBaGeL
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Joe Summer said:


Timeout was the right call there. "Icing" only has a 1% success rate on short field goals. I would think that having only 10 players would result in far more than just 1% differential.

OR ... you could just put 11 players out there in the first place.

Bad coaching.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, msudaisy26 said:

Like he said, these guys aren't HARVARD graduates!!!

All kidding aside, are the Harvard/Ivy League grads in the NFL generally considered to be smart players? Thinking about Fitz, Brate, Jusczyk, Garrett, etc. Not saying they're dumb, just that braininess isn't part of their rep.

By contrast, a lot of the Stanford alums (Luck, Sherman, Baldwin) are frequently described as intelligent.

Not trying to make a broader point, just thought it was interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, zftcg said:

All kidding aside, are the Harvard/Ivy League grads in the NFL generally considered to be smart players? Thinking about Fitz, Brate, Jusczyk, Garrett, etc. Not saying they're dumb, just that braininess isn't part of their rep.

By contrast, a lot of the Stanford alums (Luck, Sherman, Baldwin) are frequently described as intelligent.

Not trying to make a broader point, just thought it was interesting.

Fact is that every business has losers who are promoted above their skill level. NFL is not immune and it shows. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bossman said:

If the DEN players had all hope of winning that game squashed when NE scored 7 off that punt fumble.

Not only the muffed punt that NE turned into 7 points 2 plays later ... but they gave up a Kickoff return TD for 7, gave up a blocked punt that NE got another 3 points , ...

and the punt return team had a "12 men on the field" penalty on 4 and 5 that gave NE a 1st down. How does that even happen?? NE gets 7 more on that one.

DEN special teams gave up 24 points by themselves.

Also, Al Michaels pointing out a play where DEN defense gave up a TD while only having 10 players on the field. Seems the DEN coaches may be way over their heads.

 

This performance was pathetic.  Olivio (Special Teams Coach) should have been fired immediately.  That kind of incompetence cannot be allowed to continue.  Denver lost by 24 and Special Teams gave up 25... 

Denver came out with a great first series and stuffed NE.  Brady has always struggled in Denver and his confidence could have been kept down by Denver offense taking the field and moving the ball... but to give NE free points and an easy score likely shifted the entire outcome of the game. (Not saying Denver would have won, but I think the game would have been close - the Den Offense put up 16 points midway through the game and should have been in a close game).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, lod001 said:

The Jax staff took stupid up a notch this past week. They had Bortles throwing a 20 yard pass on 3rd down, in FG range to tie the game with 1:48 left. INT. They got lucky to get the ball back with a minute left and tried everything they could to run out of time before kicking the tying FG, getting lucky again with a roughing the passer call. Then in OT, they got an INT in FG rage but decided to dick around with the ball a couple times instead of kicking a 35 yard FG. They ran it for a yard, ran it for a yard, Bortles then loses 2 yards on 3rd down putting the ball on the left hash mark. Risking holding penalties or false starts instead of trotting out and kicking it right away...just to kick for the same spot they were at to begin with. They then were gifted 5 yards by the other teams penalty.

To be fair they were barely in FG range (54 yarder) with a backup long snapper.

3-25-LAC 37 (1:33) (Shotgun) 5-B.Bortles pass deep middle intended for 11-M.Lee INTERCEPTED by 33-T.Boston [99-J.Bosa] at LAC 10. 33-T.Boston ran ob at LAC 10 for no gain.

There was a whole lot of stupid for teh Jags yesterday and that was a terrible decision by Bortles but not sure I fault the coaching staff for passing. Maybe they were hoping for an underneath dumpoff?

But, yes in OT, they should have kicked on 3rd down, if not sooner. I think they were worried again about the snapper and leaving time on the clock in case of a bad snap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2017 at 2:02 PM, zftcg said:

All kidding aside, are the Harvard/Ivy League grads in the NFL generally considered to be smart players? Thinking about Fitz, Brate, Jusczyk, Garrett, etc. Not saying they're dumb, just that braininess isn't part of their rep.

By contrast, a lot of the Stanford alums (Luck, Sherman, Baldwin) are frequently described as intelligent.

Not trying to make a broader point, just thought it was interesting.

Garrett went to Princeton and transferred to Columbia. As far as I know, he and Bill O'Brien (Brown) are the only head coaches who went to an Ivy league school. You be the judge if they are any smarter than the other coaches in the NFL. My opinion is there is book smart and there is football smart. The ivy league guys don't necessarily have the latter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DropKick said:
5 minutes ago, ldizzle said:

Wtf was that? 4th and 1 ten seconds left in the first half, and they do a fake RUN?! They're only down 17-24!!!

Full context: only 7 seconds on the clock from outside the 20?   Chance of a FG? 95%  Change of a TD?  1%

These are paid professionals, gelntleman - the world class experts in their chosen field.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BobbyLayne said:

These are paid professionals, gelntleman - the world class experts in their chosen field.

Once again they confirm my statement that some of these guys would be teaching phys-ed in high school if they didn't have NFL connections. That's dumb people hiring dumber people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete Carroll will get no sleep tonight... the fake FG was very odd (and obviously unsuccessful), but he almost got away with it if they could have got the tying field goal at the end... but the CLOCK got him after wasting a timeout with a terrible challenge of a Doug Baldwin non-catch in the 3rd QTR. Pretty obvious that ball hit the ground.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...