ghostguy123
Footballguy
Dont forget to factor in how demoralozing it is for the players to kick a stupid FG.
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.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.
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.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
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.Lost in the discussion is Arians accepting the intentional penalty. Why did he do that?
I believe the clock would only stay stopped after a penalty if the clock was previously stopped before penalty committed.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.
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.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.
In some scenarios, Rodgers would also have time on the clock for a GB drive to tie the game with a FG.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.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.
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.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'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.Dont forget to factor in how demoralozing it is for the players to kick a stupid FG.
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.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.
he is so good - he failed the prior 3 downs to score from the 8ghostguy123 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.
Worst post ever candidatehe 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
Yup. It just happened two weeks ago. No excuse for making this mistake.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
How will this idiot bruce Arians ever last?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.
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.Yup. It just happened two weeks ago. No excuse for making this mistake.
The first timeout was dumb. That next one was wow, just wow badYeah 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.
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 first timeout was dumb. That next one was wow, just wow bad
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.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.
Pretty much sums it upThat didn't take long. Dallas 4th and goal from the 3 down five. McCarthy sends in the FG unit. Good thing he spent his year off learning all about analytics.
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).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.
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.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.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?
That’s true.Also, Bucs defense was not helped by FOUR Bucs turnovers (taken away, this game would have been a blowout).
Especially with a K who’d just missed from 31, and a 33 yard PAT.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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
Okay, so
*Texans pick up 13 yards on 3rd and 15
*Browns called for offsides
*Texans can choose between 4th and 2 or 3rd and 10
*They choose 4th and 2
*They then punt the ball away
The Kevin Stefanski reaction is amazing
PS They presumably took the yards in order to pin the Browns deep, except the punt went into the end zone for a touchbackThis honestly might be one of the best ones ever.
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).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.