Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Post here when coaches do something you disagree with


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CalBear said:

Exactly. People are talking about fourth-and-8 as if it's the end of the game. At the very best—if you make it and you make the 2-point conversion (give those whatever chance you like but it's well under 50% combined)—now you're handing the ball to Tom Brady with over 2 minutes left when all he needs is a FG to win the game. Which, it turns out, is exactly how Brady won most of his biggest games. 

Every possible scenario required stopping the Bucs offense, unless the Bucs tried an onside kick and successfully recovered it, preventing the Bucs offense from getting the ball. So I find this post irrelevant. Yes, stopping them would have been very difficult... but it was required no matter what. So that really shouldn't have much bearing on whether or not to kick the FG or go for the TD IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

According to the ESPN Win Probability Model, GB had a 10% chance of winning the game by going for it and a 9.5% chance by kicking the FG.

LINK

This was about how I was seeing it. Seemed about even in my mind. I was surprised to see lots of people around me think kicking the FG was insane. I was ok with either decision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kittenmittens said:

Lost in the discussion is Arians accepting the intentional penalty.  Why did he do that? 

Thought about it at the time... Couldn't Green Bay just intentionally commit another penalty?  It would never end.  Also, I think I like the five yards and the first down vs 2nd and short.  Sure, the latter gives you the potential to convert and potentially run more plays but a negative play could compromise your ability to convert leading to fewer plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, DropKick said:

Thought about it at the time... Couldn't Green Bay just intentionally commit another penalty?  It would never end.  Also, I think I like the five yards and the first down vs 2nd and short.  Sure, the latter gives you the potential to convert and potentially run more plays but a negative play could compromise your ability to convert leading to fewer plays.

I believe the clock would only stay stopped after a penalty if the clock was previously stopped before penalty committed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cobbler1 said:

There’s plenty of branches. Most of them offsetting or small as you say. The biggest one left out is probably the 75 ish % chance you don’t get the 4th and goal you still have a chance to stop them, get the ball back, and drive 60 ish yards to score and get the 2 and win in OT. That’s probably .75 * .5 * .3 * .5 *.5. That adds another 3% to the winning outcomes of going for it. It’s very interesting to me.

Adding to this, the 12.5% of the time you get the td but don’t get the 2, you now need a stop and to drive 30-40 yards for a game winning fg attempt. .125 * .5 * .5 (tough number to figure out how frequently Rodgers would get the 30-40 yards needed in this situation and then Crosby would make the kick). Maybe it’s lower than 50% but you can adjust accordingly if you think so. Using 50% for it adds another 3.125% to the winning outcomes in the go for it scenario. I agreed wholeheartedly with CalBears logic on his initial post but now I’m seeing that the possible winning outcomes, even if you don’t get the td or do get the td but not the 2pt conversion, add significantly to your winning scenarios. I can see how the math is pretty close to even as Anarchy points out in his link with the espn win probability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CalBear said:

Exactly. People are talking about fourth-and-8 as if it's the end of the game. At the very best—if you make it and you make the 2-point conversion (give those whatever chance you like but it's well under 50% combined)—now you're handing the ball to Tom Brady with over 2 minutes left when all he needs is a FG to win the game. Which, it turns out, is exactly how Brady won most of his biggest games. 

In some scenarios, Rodgers would also have time on the clock for a GB drive to tie the game with a FG.

If the probabilities are close, which I'm now convinced they are, I give MVP HOF QB Rodgers one more shot from the 8 yard line. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CalBear said:

Exactly. People are talking about fourth-and-8 as if it's the end of the game. At the very best—if you make it and you make the 2-point conversion (give those whatever chance you like but it's well under 50% combined)—now you're handing the ball to Tom Brady with over 2 minutes left when all he needs is a FG to win the game. Which, it turns out, is exactly how Brady won most of his biggest games. 

Agreed.  In the scenario that happened, the Bucs are likely to run the ball several times, so you only need 1 or 2 stops on a pass play.  Had they scored the TD and gotten the 2, the game is now tied and the Bucs offense is in aggressive mode to try and win the game.  Not saying I totally agree with the decision to kick the FG, but I don't think it's as egregiously bad are some are making it out to be.  

Rodgers should be taking more heat for not running in on 3rd instead of throwing a bad pass.  He had daylight and could have either scored or at least gotten it pretty close to where going for it on 4th down was more likely.  If he thought they were going for it on 4th down, which he claimed afterwards, then getting it close at least then puts them in a situation where you can run or pass, making it a little harder to defend. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DropKick said:

Thought about it at the time... Couldn't Green Bay just intentionally commit another penalty?  It would never end.  Also, I think I like the five yards and the first down vs 2nd and short.  Sure, the latter gives you the potential to convert and potentially run more plays but a negative play could compromise your ability to convert leading to fewer plays.

I think there is a rule against GB doing that but I could be mistaken.  I think TB really only needed a single first down to make a green bay win nearly impossible without Pettine or Gregg Williams calling the defense for the Bucs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ghostguy123 said:

Dont forget to factor in how demoralozing it is for the players to kick a stupid FG.  

I'm for getting rid of kicking altogether. Make everyone go for it on 4th, and only 2 point plays after a TD. Kickers, punters, and long snappers might not like it, but who cares.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Just Win Baby said:

Every possible scenario required stopping the Bucs offense, unless the Bucs tried an onside kick and successfully recovered it, preventing the Bucs offense from getting the ball. So I find this post irrelevant. Yes, stopping them would have been very difficult... but it was required no matter what. So that really shouldn't have much bearing on whether or not to kick the FG or go for the TD IMO.

I agree to a certain point.  The difference is what TB would be trying to do in varying scenarios.  If GB tied the game then TB is in a mode to get the FG to win.  Their offense will be a lot more "creative" because they are actually trying to move the ball rather than run out the clock.  This makes stopping them a bit more difficult in theory because more of their playbook is in play (and still gives TB a decent chance to win the game in regulation based on the time remaining).  You can also say that by kicking the FG put GB in a chance to win in regulation so opening up the playbook a bit more is warranted as now losing in regulation is a possibility if TB gives the ball back (also making stopping them more difficult in theory).  Going for the TD and not getting it now puts TB in a situation where they primarily want to run as much of the clock off and that is somewhat more important because if they give the ball back a TD/2PT only ties the game (and may leave time on the clock for TB to have their own chance to go back and score in regulation).  This is probably the "easiest" situation to stop TB as there is a most likely chance of narrowing the playbook for TB.  

 

All this to say that each scenario slightly changes the stoppage percentage because TB has a slightly different goal for their drive which may affect play calling and thus your defensive play calls.  

 

Regardless, I would have gone for it even though I am now at least warming to the idea that kicking the FG has a lot more merit than I initially gave it credit for.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/24/2021 at 9:57 PM, ghostguy123 said:

If the packers go for it and don't get it, the bucs are pinned deep.  If they go 3 and out the pack gets the ball again with great field position.

The right play was to go for it.  You have freaking Rodgers. 

he is so good - he failed the prior 3 downs to score from the 8

refused to scramble for the score in a championship game

that Rodgers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted a new thread dedicated specifically to this GB decision. I couldn't sit still with the bad presumptions being made here that if they went for the TD there wouldn't still be a ton of action in regulation. Like OT is the only path to victory. I have GB as 17.2% to win in regulation if they score a TD. Here is my work:

https://forums.footballguys.com/topic/792583-a-deeper-dive-into-the-4th-and-8-decision-by-gb-in-the-nfc-title-game/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
7 minutes ago, ghostguy123 said:

Pretty obviously bad decision for Kansas City to be calling timeouts at the end of the first half when Tampa was literally going to just run the clock out and go into halftime.  

Instead of 14-6, its 21-6.  Silly

Yup.  It just happened two weeks ago.  No excuse for making this mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/18/2013 at 12:04 AM, GreenNGold said:

Tonight, Bruce Arians, head coach of the Arizona Cardinals chose to kick a field goal from the 4 yard line while down 18 points in the 4th quarter. I thought NFL coaches were supposed to understand the game? I mean, how do people who are so incompetent get these jobs that pay millions of dollars per year? I really feel like acts like this should be a fireable offense, similar to how John Fox cost the Broncos any chance in the playoffs last year (2012), yet he still has a job too.

I made a post similar to this in the Seahawks-Cardinals game thread tonight, but thought it could make a good thread.

How will this idiot bruce Arians ever last?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alex P Keaton said:

Yup.  It just happened two weeks ago.  No excuse for making this mistake.

Yeah that was dumb. The first timeout ok I get it. Maybe you get a sack or inc or something. But after they gained 8 yards to make it a 3rd and short close to the 40 there’s very little upside. Most likely if you get the stop you’re getting it back around your 20 with 1 or 0 TOs and 30-35 seconds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

Yeah that was dumb. The first timeout ok I get it. Maybe you get a sack or inc or something. But after they gained 8 yards to make it a 3rd and short close to the 40 there’s very little upside. Most likely if you get the stop you’re getting it back around your 20 with 1 or 0 TOs and 30-35 seconds. 

The first timeout was dumb.  That next one was wow, just wow bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ghostguy123 said:

The first timeout was dumb.  That next one was wow, just wow bad

I disagree that the first was dumb. They had a decent shot at getting the ball back and driving for a fg at that point. After the solid gain on 2nd the risk of surrendering points was too much for my liking.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

I disagree that the first was dumb. They had a decent shot at getting the ball back and driving for a fg at that point. After the solid gain on 2nd the risk of surrendering points was too much for my liking.

The risk of going down 11 (ended up 15 cause, well, its Brady after all) is way bigger than the reward of getting within 5. 

Just a bad decision.  

Go into the half, regroup, come out down 1 score.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Per roto

Jaguars hired strength and conditioning coach Chris Doyle.  

Doyle is best known as an Iowa strength and conditioning coach who allegedly used racist language and whose workouts put more than a dozen Iowa players in the hospital during his two decades at the university. Doyle received a $1.11 million contract buyout in June 2020 after racial bias accusations surfaced, and will now join a coaching staff in a league where nearly seven in ten players are black. Last June, former Iowa defensive back Diauntae Morrow tweeted, "Doyle made a comment about sending back to the GHETTO."  Former Hawkeyes linebacker Terrance Pryor alleged Doyle told him, "Maybe you should take up rowing or something, you know? Oh wait, Black people don't like boats in water, do they?" ESPN's Adam Schefter said Jaguars head coach Urban Meyer "vetted his hire, and he is confident there will be no issues with Doyle." Meyer's backing of a coach with a well-documented racist history could make the Jaguars a less desirable landing spot for free agents this offseason.  

 

Gooooo jags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I disagree with both coaches approach to this game. 

Neither attempted to establish the run, both played almost exclusively out of the shotgun.

it was a weird game. I expected the Cowboys to play terribly on defense. I’m not sure what the Bucs excuse was. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I disagree with both coaches approach to this game. 

Neither attempted to establish the run, both played almost exclusively out of the shotgun.

it was a weird game. I expected the Cowboys to play terribly on defense. I’m not sure what the Bucs excuse was. 

A few thoughts...today's league strongly favors the passing offense, its week 1 and takes a month for most teams to establish the run (exceptions: SF, Balt, NE, etc.), Zack Martin is Dallas's best run blocker and was out due to covid, Tampa's "excuse" is that they are built to completely stop the run and pressure the pass and Dallas help up well against pass rush.  Also, Bucs defense was not helped by FOUR Bucs turnovers (taken away, this game would have been a blowout).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not stupid but in the moment I second-guessed this call by Arians.

Final TB Drive:  1st & 10 at TB 37

(0:55 - 4th) (No Huddle, Shotgun) PENALTY on TB-D.Smith, False Start, 5 yards, enforced at TB 37 - No Play.

They're now back at 1st & 15 at TB 32 

Tampa has the choice to keep their last TO and take a 10 second runoff to 0:45 or use it and stay at 0:55.

Of course it ended up working out but with less than a minute and around 40 yards to get into FG range I would think it would benefit you to hold onto the timeout to keep the threat of a pass into the middle of the field alive so the defense can't completely focus on the sidelines?  Or to use if you need to bring on the kicking team in a hurry. 

Would you take the TO or the 10 second runoff there?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lehigh98 said:

Not stupid but in the moment I second-guessed this call by Arians.

Final TB Drive:  1st & 10 at TB 37

(0:55 - 4th) (No Huddle, Shotgun) PENALTY on TB-D.Smith, False Start, 5 yards, enforced at TB 37 - No Play.

They're now back at 1st & 15 at TB 32 

Tampa has the choice to keep their last TO and take a 10 second runoff to 0:45 or use it and stay at 0:55.

Of course it ended up working out but with less than a minute and around 40 yards to get into FG range I would think it would benefit you to hold onto the timeout to keep the threat of a pass into the middle of the field alive so the defense can't completely focus on the sidelines?  Or to use if you need to bring on the kicking team in a hurry. 

Would you take the TO or the 10 second runoff there?

With Brady, Gronk, Evans, Brown and Godwin I take the TO as the priority there was to be sure to have enough time to get gain 40 yards.  Outside the red zone the inherent bias of defenses in this situation is to "over-protect" against the bomb and "let" you dink and dunk into field goal range.  That's the part I question....in today's pass happy league I'd be inclined to go zero blitz and get the ball back with 30 seconds left down 6  rather than make it easy to lose by 2....particularly since combined passing yards approached 800 yards (!!!!) last night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lehigh98 said:

Not stupid but in the moment I second-guessed this call by Arians.

Final TB Drive:  1st & 10 at TB 37

(0:55 - 4th) (No Huddle, Shotgun) PENALTY on TB-D.Smith, False Start, 5 yards, enforced at TB 37 - No Play.

They're now back at 1st & 15 at TB 32 

Tampa has the choice to keep their last TO and take a 10 second runoff to 0:45 or use it and stay at 0:55.

Of course it ended up working out but with less than a minute and around 40 yards to get into FG range I would think it would benefit you to hold onto the timeout to keep the threat of a pass into the middle of the field alive so the defense can't completely focus on the sidelines?  Or to use if you need to bring on the kicking team in a hurry. 

Would you take the TO or the 10 second runoff there?

I had the same thought and was equally surprised they used the TO. I guess the logic was that if they had to rush up to the line to get a play off they could probably do it in less than 10 seconds, so net they came out ahead. You're right about its potential impact on play calling, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, SeniorVBDStudent said:

Also, Bucs defense was not helped by FOUR Bucs turnovers (taken away, this game would have been a blowout).

That’s true. 

But on one of those, wasn’t it strange that they brought in Bernard, then threw to Lenny “vollyball” Fournette?

I found that odd coaching-wise as well. Bernard didn’t see the field until the 4th. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Synthesizer said:

What are the odds of making a 60 yard FG?  Because McCarthy sent out the FG unit for a 60-yarder with 20 seconds left in the half.  Seemed likely they were giving the ball back to Brady at midfield and that's exactly what happened.

Especially with a K who’d just missed from 31, and a 33 yard PAT. 

that was also a very odd decision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Synthesizer said:

What are the odds of making a 60 yard FG?  Because McCarthy sent out the FG unit for a 60-yarder with 20 seconds left in the half.  Seemed likely they were giving the ball back to Brady at midfield and that's exactly what happened.

 

It's certainly a longshot, but I'm thinking it was worth the risk.  Zuerlein has hit from 60+ before in his career and I'd assume they wouldn't send him out there unless he could potentially make one that far out.  

TB was out of TOs and had 15 secs left at midfield after the missed FG.  And Succop has one of the weaker legs in the NFL.  So it'd be a pretty tall task to get even 10-15 yards when Dallas knows you have to go sideline only.  

It may have still been the wrong decision, but I think it was probably a very close call.  And down 5, on the road as a big dog, going with the more aggressive play seems ok to me.

 

 

omg, I just defended the coaching genius of Mike McCarthy.  I need a drink.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of teams operating with limited time remaining and lacking timeouts, when teams have no choice but to work the sideline, maybe teams should cover the sideline? It seems like defenses have no qualms about giving up three quick dump offs that take up about 12 seconds and give away 30 yards of field position in the process.

If teams are going to basically give away 30 yards, they might as well leave the middle of the field open and encourage the offense to get 30 yards in one play and burn their last timeout.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

Speaking of teams operating with limited time remaining and lacking timeouts, when teams have no choice but to work the sideline, maybe teams should cover the sideline? It seems like defenses have no qualms about giving up three quick dump offs that take up about 12 seconds and give away 30 yards of field position in the process.

If teams are going to basically give away 30 yards, they might as well leave the middle of the field open and encourage the offense to get 30 yards in one play and burn their last timeout.

 

If you're referring to TB's last drive, I'll add how about maybe having someone covering Gronk?  Like literally anyone. Those 2 receptions on that drive, he was wide open. Did Dallas think Brady was gonna air it out deep with 1:30 on the clock? 

But there's Gronk, wide open in the flat, not a defender within 10 yards of him, allowing a catch & run to the sideline for 6 yards, then the next one for 20 yards. He was undefended on those two plays. 

I was kind of shocked. I understand that a LB is unlikely to effectively contain Gronk, but there shoulda been one on him regardless. That was way too soft, IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

 

If you're referring to TB's last drive, I'll add how about maybe having someone covering Gronk?  Like literally anyone. Those 2 receptions on that drive, he was wide open. Did Dallas think Brady was gonna air it out deep with 1:30 on the clock? 

But there's Gronk, wide open in the flat, not a defender within 10 yards of him, allowing a catch & run to the sideline for 6 yards, then the next one for 20 yards. He was undefended on those two plays. 

I was kind of shocked. I understand that a LB is unlikely to effectively contain Gronk, but there shoulda been one on him regardless. That was way too soft, IMO. 

IMO, the defensive play in those situations is to drop 9 guys in coverage and not let anyone near the sideline. With that many people in coverage, even a pass completed in the middle of the field shouldn't go for huge yardage. Brady would be unlikely to pull the ball down and take off for the sideline, and even if he did, it would take up way more time than just flipping the ball out to the flat for free yardage and a step out of bounds.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Anarchy99 said:

IMO, the defensive play in those situations is to drop 9 guys in coverage and not let anyone near the sideline. With that many people in coverage, even a pass completed in the middle of the field shouldn't go for huge yardage. Brady would be unlikely to pull the ball down and take off for the sideline, and even if he did, it would take up way more time than just flipping the ball out to the flat for free yardage and a step out of bounds.

 

I agree - I just don't see how you let Gronk gallop for 20 in that situation. 

That said, it's certainly not the first time. Probably won't be the last. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

 

That’s true. 

But on one of those, wasn’t it strange that they brought in Bernard, then threw to Lenny “vollyball” Fournette?

I found that odd coaching-wise as well. Bernard didn’t see the field until the 4th. 

It was funny listening to Collinsworth's babbling on about how Arians had heaped praise on Lenny's improved catching skills....while they were showing Lenny muff a lob from TB and tip it to a nearby defender.  Michaels and Collingsworth are moderately tolerable but sometimes they sound like idiots.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one goes out to Arians & Hoodie:

Defensive players get paid, too. Every HOF RB fumbled the ball during their careers. 

A tough fumble where the QB sets up the RB for a huge hit (like RoJo on his Kees last year) or where a defensive player takes a perfect angle & punches the ball out should not automatically mean a trip to the gulag end of the bench.

Or a Harris fumble after building him up all offseason & seeing him shine other than that lone mistake, for another example. 

I don’t have either of these guys in redraft, but it strikes me as overbearing, reactionary & counterproductive.

it’s football. Players fumble. It’s not ideal, but it’s part of the game. Putting that much of a penalty on a situation that’s already stressing a player is unlikely to prevent it from ever happening again - it just comes off as unnecessarily punitive.  I disagree with the approach. 

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Mister CIA said:

Gruden with HoF effort tonight.

I'll just bump this for convenience and let someone else fill in the details.  I would exhaust all my remaining IQ points trying to describe the stupidity of the final OT drive.

For one, getting a delay of game when slowly rushing the kicker out for what would've been a 43 yard fg attempt on 2nd down, with no TOs remaining. After the 5 yard penalty, give some credit to Gruden for pulling the fg unit and calling a passing play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no "Post when coaches do something you agree with" thread, but Baltimore was absolutely right to go for it on that last 4th down. I think a very good rule of thumb is "Don't give the ball back to great QBs with a chance for them to win the game," and yet teams always seem to do that. Kudos to Harbaugh for letting the best running QB in NFL history get that yard.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ignatiusjreilly said:

 

You knew Culley was going to be a conservative coach when in the preseason he said, "if we have to run 3 plays and punt then we will run 3 plays and punt". In his mind 8 yards of field position was better than a chance to keep a drive alive. Because he was hired as basically a lame duck coach and knows he is never going to get another chance at this at his age, I think he has decided he will call it the way he sees it, and not worry about traditional thinking. I think we could see more of these types of decisions from Culley this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dhockster said:

You knew Culley was going to be a conservative coach when in the preseason he said, "if we have to run 3 plays and punt then we will run 3 plays and punt". In his mind 8 yards of field position was better than a chance to keep a drive alive. Because he was hired as basically a lame duck coach and knows he is never going to get another chance at this at his age, I think he has decided he will call it the way he sees it, and not worry about traditional thinking. I think we could see more of these types of decisions from Culley this year. 

To his credit(?) he admitted today that he should have taken the penalty (although I wonder what the numbers say between 3rd and 10 vs 4th and 2). 

That said, admitting that he made a bad decision because he got frustrated won't do much to dispel feelings that he's out of his depth as a HC.

  • Like 1
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...