The 2023 NFL Season Thread

[GeoWar]

Titans hiring Callahan ....

[pilight]

Falcons are hiring Raheem Morris. Seems nobody wants to start over with a septuagenarian coach.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by pilight

Falcons are hiring Raheem Morris. Seems nobody wants to start over with a septuagenarian coach.

Smart if you ask me. Belichek is not a genius. He's very good at getting his team to play disciplined & better at that than anybody else. He is more flexible than almost anyone else when it comes to winning. But he doesn't have a magic recipe. The only teams who could use Belichek aren't in search of a HC. Belichek needs fit in at a team who already has the talent, but not the leadership.

[Cobra Mgr]

Ravens beat the Ravens every bit as much as the Chiefs did.

[cephasjames]

I don't think giving up 27 points while not scoring any is a good way to win a game.

[dsvitak]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

I don't think giving up 27 points while not scoring any is a good way to win a game.

Not putting points on the board, TWICE, absolutely cost them the game.

[Cobra Mgr]

Disappointed for the Lions fans. But, if they had to lose, I'm glad it points the finger at all of that video game, never punt philosophy the new jack "experts" always tout.

[cephasjames]

While the 4th and go bit them in the butt a couple of times, that wasn't what killed the Lions. First and foremost it was San Fran just upping their game. Second, it was dropped balls. The Lions just could not stop SF and couldn't get it done.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

While the 4th and go bit them in the butt a couple of times, that wasn't what killed the Lions. First and foremost it was San Fran just upping their game. Second, it was dropped balls. The Lions just could not stop SF and couldn't get it done.

I disagree. The problem I have w/the aggressive 4th down calls is it only looks at the probability of success. It doesn't look at the consequences of failing. It doesn't take into account the flow of the game or current game circumstances. It doesn't take into account whether points are involved.

I understand Campbell not backing away from his philosophy @ that moment because it sends a message to your team of either panic or tightness. You want your team to keep that attitude you've been fostering since you got there. So I get it.

But tonight it showed the flaw of such a strategy. The first one was the worst call. SF just got a FG. You kick a FG there, you send a thought into the Niners, we just wasted half the quarter and haven't made any headway. Not only did the Lions fail, they now gave the Niners a boost, the D got hope that they could stop the Lions and the Lions did wind up getting tight.

That got things snowballing. A dropped INT that set up a score, a fumble that set up another score. Another dropped 1st down that set up another score.

That 3 points wasn't just the final margin of victory. It was a missed opportunity that caused the dominos to fall.

That's why I said earlier all of that analytic stuff has a place. But the best coaches know how to measure unmeasurable. Their gut tells them what the calculators don't.

[DamPenguin]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

I disagree. The problem I have w/the aggressive 4th down calls is it only looks at the probability of success. It doesn't look at the consequences of failing. It doesn't take into account the flow of the game or current game circumstances. It doesn't take into account whether points are involved.

I understand Campbell not backing away from his philosophy @ that moment because it sends a message to your team of either panic or tightness. You want your team to keep that attitude you've been fostering since you got there. So I get it.

But tonight it showed the flaw of such a strategy. The first one was the worst call. SF just got a FG. You kick a FG there, you send a thought into the Niners, we just wasted half the quarter and haven't made any headway. Not only did the Lions fail, they now gave the Niners a boost, the D got hope that they could stop the Lions and the Lions did wind up getting tight.

That got things snowballing. A dropped INT that set up a score, a fumble that set up another score. Another dropped 1st down that set up another score.

That 3 points wasn't just the final margin of victory. It was a missed opportunity that caused the dominos to fall.

That's why I said earlier all of that analytic stuff has a place. But the best coaches know how to measure unmeasurable. Their gut tells them what the calculators don't.

I agree 100%

[Amazin69]

A pity the Lions scored that late TD. I could have snarked much harder if they'd gotten bageled in the 2nd half.

Ah, well.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

While the 4th and go bit them in the butt a couple of times, that wasn't what killed the Lions. First and foremost it was San Fran just upping their game. Second, it was dropped balls. The Lions just could not stop SF and couldn't get it done.

It was absolutely the 4th down that cost them the game. Two reasons. I'll explain. Mainly the first failed attempt.

You never ever pass up a FG if it is going to put you up by another score. Especially in the 2nd half.

But the bigger issue is psychological. The 49ers were being smacked. They came out in the second half, drove the field and got a FG making it 24-10. The Lions go right down the field. Here is where they have to match that FG. Let the 49ers know they've gained no ground. Still down by 3 scores. That's mentally taxing.

Go for it on 4th and fail, you just gave the 49ers the light at the end of the tunnel. You gave them the momentum. Now if they score, they're only 1 score down. That failed 4th down is what pumped life into the 49ers.

WR Reynolds also contributed greatly with two awful drops. But the turning point in the game was that first failed 4th down. When I played online H2H football in the late 90s, even the video game coaches wouldn't be dumb enough to pass up a 3 score lead in the 3rd quarter.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

I disagree. The problem I have w/the aggressive 4th down calls is it only looks at the probability of success. It doesn't look at the consequences of failing. It doesn't take into account the flow of the game or current game circumstances. It doesn't take into account whether points are involved.

I understand Campbell not backing away from his philosophy @ that moment because it sends a message to your team of either panic or tightness. You want your team to keep that attitude you've been fostering since you got there. So I get it.

But tonight it showed the flaw of such a strategy. The first one was the worst call. SF just got a FG. You kick a FG there, you send a thought into the Niners, we just wasted half the quarter and haven't made any headway. Not only did the Lions fail, they now gave the Niners a boost, the D got hope that they could stop the Lions and the Lions did wind up getting tight.

That got things snowballing. A dropped INT that set up a score, a fumble that set up another score. Another dropped 1st down that set up another score.

That 3 points wasn't just the final margin of victory. It was a missed opportunity that caused the dominos to fall.

That's why I said earlier all of that analytic stuff has a place. But the best coaches know how to measure unmeasurable. Their gut tells them what the calculators don't.

I wrote my post after reading the post above yours, and before reading your post. Then read your post afterwards. Several similar thoughts.

The bold is my biggest problem with analytics. The overall probability has nothing to do with the game you're currently playing.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

It was absolutely the 4th down that cost them the game. Two reasons. I'll explain. Mainly the first failed attempt.

You never ever pass up a FG if it is going to put you up by another score. Especially in the 2nd half.

But the bigger issue is psychological. The 49ers were being smacked. They came out in the second half, drove the field and got a FG making it 24-10. The Lions go right down the field. Here is where they have to match that FG. Let the 49ers know they've gained no ground. Still down by 3 scores. That's mentally taxing.

Go for it on 4th and fail, you just gave the 49ers the light at the end of the tunnel. You gave them the momentum. Now if they score, they're only 1 score down. That failed 4th down is what pumped life into the 49ers.

WR Reynolds also contributed greatly with two awful drops. But the turning point in the game was that first failed 4th down. When I played online H2H football in the late 90s, even the video game coaches wouldn't be dumb enough to pass up a 3 score lead in the 3rd quarter.

"Turning point" does not equal "result of game." Lions could have shut SF down. They did not. Failed plays of any kind can change momentum in a game. In either direction. That doesn't mean those plays are the reason for a loss.

The Lions blew a lot of plays in the 2nd half. They had way more opportunities than just two failed fourth down attempts to turn it around and they didn't.

Dropped catches shift momentum. Bad passes shift momentum. Stifled runs shift momentum. Lions had all of those in spades. Bobbled passes going your way shift momentum. Break-out runs from running backs averaging 2-3 yds/carry shift momentum. QB scrambles for 10+ yds shift momentum. SF had those in spades.

To say two failed plays are the reason the Lions lost is short-sighted.

[CONN CHRIS]

I am not a Lions fan but have a kindred spirit with that type of fan base. Tough one.

With my team out, I rooted for the Ravens and Lions - felt like a normal playoff football Sunday for me.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

"Turning point" does not equal "result of game." Lions could have shut SF down. They did not. Failed plays of any kind can change momentum in a game. In either direction. That doesn't mean those plays are the reason for a loss.

The Lions blew a lot of plays in the 2nd half. They had way more opportunities than just two failed fourth down attempts to turn it around and they didn't.

Dropped catches shift momentum. Bad passes shift momentum. Stifled runs shift momentum. Lions had all of those in spades. Bobbled passes going your way shift momentum. Break-out runs from running backs averaging 2-3 yds/carry shift momentum. QB scrambles for 10+ yds shift momentum. SF had those in spades.

To say two failed plays are the reason the Lions lost is short-sighted.

And to ignore the fact one play can ignite a comeback is just as short sighted. No one claims the Lions were doomed on one play. But one play lit the flame. What happened afterward was merely fuel for a bigger dumpster fire.

[cephasjames]

No one is ignoring that one (or two) plays can ignite a momentum change. In fact, I acknowledged that.

And you're correct, no one claims the Lions were doomed on one play. They claimed that about two plays. Which is what I've pushed back against.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

No one is ignoring that one (or two) plays can ignite a momentum change. In fact, I acknowledged that.

And you're correct, no one claims the Lions were doomed on one play. They claimed that about two plays. Which is what I've pushed back against.

Two plays where they neglected to go for 3 in a game where the margin was 3.

Do the math.

[cephasjames]

Touchdowns are worth 6 points. Extra points are worth 1. 7 is greater than 3.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Touchdowns are worth 6 points. Extra points are worth 1. 7 is greater than 3.

Very good.


Now let's add the potential 6 points Detroit passed on to the final score. What do we have now class?