Playoff games

[Steel Ubaldo]

I would be so gutted to be a Lions fan to lose by 3 pts when your meat head coach just simply refused to kick a FG.

Does their kicker suck? Is 48 yards too far for him?

From the Twitter:

Lions kicker Michael Badgley (University of Miami) was 4 of 4 on field goals this season. He was 24 of 28 last season. He’s made 82.4 percent career. He’s made 93 of 106 from under 50. That’s 87.7 percent

[zeke5123]

This whole “faithful” thing is dumb. Really dumb.

[langer]

Kenny is running in slo-mo compared to every QB today.

The immediacy and quick decisions making of all those guys is on another level that Kenny Football.

He has to work on that or just GTFO.

I'm not sure his benching will get through to him.

Oh well.

Great game today, one of the most intense and wild I've ever seen. Good stuff Rog.

[W&M_Steeler]

I would be so gutted to be a Lions fan to lose by 3 pts when your meat head coach just simply refused to kick a FG.

Does their kicker suck? Is 48 yards too far for him?

From the Twitter:

Lions kicker Michael Badgley (University of Miami) was 4 of 4 on field goals this season. He was 24 of 28 last season. He’s made 82.4 percent career. He’s made 93 of 106 from under 50. That’s 87.7 percent

I haven't been following the Lions particularly closely, so I don't know why they have a kicker who only had 4 attempts this year. I wonder if lack of trust played into not trying for 48 yard FGs?

[Dan Smith--BYU]

"This whole “faithful” thing is dumb. Really dumb."

"you gotta follow somebody"-Bob Dylan

Bay area heathens have found their substitute God now that the Warriors are in decline

[Jobu]

Does their kicker suck? Is 48 yards too far for him?

From the Twitter:

Lions kicker Michael Badgley (University of Miami) was 4 of 4 on field goals this season. He was 24 of 28 last season. He’s made 82.4 percent career. He’s made 93 of 106 from under 50. That’s 87.7 percent

I haven't been following the Lions particularly closely, so I don't know why they have a kicker who only had 4 attempts this year. I wonder if lack of trust played into not trying for 48 yard FGs?

Naah…just Dan Cambell doing Dan Cambell things.

[chippedhamsandwich]

Those two drops from Reynolds were just BRUTAL.

[AirRescueFF]

https://twitter.com/NFL_DovKleiman/stat ... ZuHyw&s=19

[RemoAZ]

https://x.com/PSchrags/status/1699785374749564954?s=20

Is that Biff in Back to the Future?

I thought I saw Gray’s Sports Almanac in his back pocket.

After I posted that I remembered no one might get an 80's movie reference anymore. I forget how old I am sometimes.

[Jobu]

Is that Biff in Back to the Future?

I thought I saw Gray’s Sports Almanac in his back pocket.

After I posted that I remembered no one might get an 80's movie reference anymore. I forget how old I am sometimes.

Just all us dinosaurs in the room…

[K_C_]

Imagine talking shit in Brock Purdy in this game to pump up Kenny Pickett and then have Purdy make play after play.

So not only are you obsessed with a QB who was benched for a third stringer but you think talking shit about a guy in the NFC championship game who turned it around in the second half to lead a big comeback

Took his team to back to back NFC Championship games, probably would’ve been back to back SBs had he not been injured last year. Just rallied his team back from 17 down in the second half, threw for more yards than Mahomes and made more plays with his legs than Lamar and people will still say he’s a game manager who is carried by his coach and skill guys or something.

The mental gymnastics people will do to prop up lil Ken and discredit Purdy is astounding.

Purdy played well enough and obviously made some huge plays when he needed to, but the Niners and Purdy have a golden horsehoe up their asses and you know it.

Last week, if Jordan Love can throw a 3 yard pass to a wide open Aaron Jones, the 49ers basically have no opportunity to win that game at the end.

Love's meltdown was epic.

I don't even need to explain how lucky the Niners were yesterday. Purdy throws what should have been his 3rd INT of the day but instead of catching Brock's gift, the DB has it clank off his facemask and into Aiyuk's hands. You cannot make shit like that up.

Campbell going for it on 4th down twice for absolutely no reason. Reynolds with 2 of the worst drops you'll ever see (the Lions had to have about 5 easy drops on the day.) Gibbs' fumble at the absolute worst time. Running the ball at the 1 yard line for absolutely no reason, killing any chance they had at a comeback.

The list goes on and on.

Purdy has shown an exceptional ability to make plays if you don't drive a stake through his heart when he gives you multiple opportunities to do just that (and Brock most certainly did his damndest to help the Lions win.....they just refused to accept his gifts.)

This isn't about Pickett. He isn't surrounded by the finest talent in the NFL at every position. Purdy is. Purdy was both a combination of lucky (real, real lucky) and good. Those plays he made with his legs were fantastic. He's developing into a very good QB but his supporting cast didn't fuck him once. Jared Goff's supporting cast, INCLUDING COACHING, fucked him about 12 times in that game.

[Dan Smith--BYU]

I'm going to defend Dan Campbell on his decisions...they didn't work out but he was statistically correct.

Just coz you held on 18 doesn't make you wrong if the dealer hits 4 after showing a 6 with a 10 down.

The problem was the DET dropsies and also a lucky fluke INT that turned into a huge completion.

Troglodytes like Tomlin will now use this as a justification to continue making too conservative decisions on 4 and 2.

[K_C_]

I'm going to defend Dan Campbell on his decisions...they didn't work out but he was statistically correct.

Just coz you held on 18 doesn't make you wrong if the dealer hits 4 after showing a 6 with a 10 down.

The problem was the DET dropsies and also a lucky fluke INT that turned into a huge completion.

Troglodytes like Tomlin will now use this as a justification to continue making too conservative decisions on 4 and 2.

There are times when going for it is the right move.

You have to make it a 3 score game there. Have to.

Momentum is very easy to lose and hard to get back and everything about that game changed on that 4th down stop.

Sure, Detroit actually looked like they were trying to lose after that play, but if that field goal is made (and odds are he makes it) and the Lions can breathe a sigh of relief and really put the 49ers behind the 8 Ball.

I get gambling and going for the kill shot, but the 49ers ramped up the pressure on Goff and made him throw the football several times before he was ready to. Even before that 4th down drop.

Had to take the points there. Had to.

[Dan Smith--BYU]

And that only gets you to a tie. There is still a greater than 50 pct chance SF wins at home in OT. Going for it on 4 and 2 was the right decision, even though outcome was wrong. If you could do a hundred Monte Carlo runs of this game it works out probably about 2/3 of the time.

Conversely you could argue that had he not taken the FG at the end of the half and had 7 they would have won.

This is on the receivers who choked under pressure.

Hindsight is easy and often wrong.

https://twitter.com/ben_bot_baldwin/sta ... s-vs-49ers

Dan Campbell is one of the best decision makers in the NFL:

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2023/9/2 ... y-4th-down

[Dan Smith--BYU]

The other problem with the brain dead hindsight media is that this encourages idiots like Tomlin to keep making bad decisions.

[Jtf]

Imagine talking shit in Brock Purdy in this game to pump up Kenny Pickett and then have Purdy make play after play.

So not only are you obsessed with a QB who was benched for a third stringer but you think talking shit about a guy in the NFC championship game who turned it around in the second half to lead a big comeback

Took his team to back to back NFC Championship games, probably would’ve been back to back SBs had he not been injured last year. Just rallied his team back from 17 down in the second half, threw for more yards than Mahomes and made more plays with his legs than Lamar and people will still say he’s a game manager who is carried by his coach and skill guys or something.

The mental gymnastics people will do to prop up lil Ken and discredit Purdy is astounding.

Purdy played well enough and obviously made some huge plays when he needed to, but the Niners and Purdy have a golden horsehoe up their asses and you know it.

Last week, if Jordan Love can throw a 3 yard pass to a wide open Aaron Jones, the 49ers basically have no opportunity to win that game at the end.

Love's meltdown was epic.

I don't even need to explain how lucky the Niners were yesterday. Purdy throws what should have been his 3rd INT of the day but instead of catching Brock's gift, the DB has it clank off his facemask and into Aiyuk's hands. You cannot make shit like that up.

Campbell going for it on 4th down twice for absolutely no reason. Reynolds with 2 of the worst drops you'll ever see (the Lions had to have about 5 easy drops on the day.) Gibbs' fumble at the absolute worst time. Running the ball at the 1 yard line for absolutely no reason, killing any chance they had at a comeback.

The list goes on and on.

Purdy has shown an exceptional ability to make plays if you don't drive a stake through his heart when he gives you multiple opportunities to do just that (and Brock most certainly did his damndest to help the Lions win.....they just refused to accept his gifts.)




Luck has a lot to do with every team winning. Niners are not the only team with luck and I don't think that should discredit Purdy. Heck, Steelers don't even make the playoffs in 2005 without some luck. They don't win in 2008 if Kurt Warner doesn't shit the bed and throw it right to Harrison. Great play by Harrison but terrible play by Warner. So luck goes into every team when they win the super bowl or go far. Some teams get calls, some teams stay healthy, some teams are lucky because interception are dropped.

Lets look at the steelers this year. They were lucky to play the bengals twice without burrow and some other back up qbs. Does it take away their playoff run? Not to me. They got in. That is all that matters.
The greatest Dynasty in football started with luck with the tuck rule call. Patriots had some luck there too.

I think some people like yourself and others are not impressed by purdy because the system he is in is pretty incredible and you being a big Pickett supporter wonder how the heck would Pickett look in that system. It seems unfair and maybe it is. We will probably never know. I am sure David Carr wonders what his NFL career could have been if he wasn't behind historical online with the Texans. Very unlucky for him. But in the end it doesn't matter. But again luck affects all these teams that win. I don't think Purdy is any different.

I think the problem how we are always comparing qbs and ranking them. In the end it doesn't matter where someone is ranked or who is really elite. Purdy works for the niners. Maybe he isn't really top 10 qb. But does it really matter? It works for them.

[K_C_]

And that only gets you to a tie. There is still a greater than 50 pct chance SF wins at home in OT. Going for it on 4 and 2 was the right decision, even though outcome was wrong. If you could do a hundred Monte Carlo runs of this game it works out probably about 2/3 of the time.

Conversely you could argue that had he not taken the FG at the end of the half and had 7 they would have won.

This is on the receivers who choked under pressure.

Hindsight is easy and often wrong.

https://twitter.com/ben_bot_baldwin/sta ... s-vs-49ers

Dan Campbell is one of the best decision makers in the NFL:

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2023/9/2 ... y-4th-down

I look at it differently.

You once again make it a 17 point game with that field goal and you're kicking off.

San Fran probably has to go 75 yards to score with ZERO momentum.

After that 4th down stop, the entire place was rockin'. Everybody and their mother knew that shit was changing.....and real fast, it was a 7 point game.

Not getting the first down there was a momentum shift that Detroit never recovered from.

I get they were going for the kill shot, but the risk there is exactly what happened. You don't convert that 4th down and not only is it still a 2 score game, but momentum has shifted completely and.....well, we all saw what happened.

Gotta pick your spots to go for the kill shot. That was not the time.

[Pabst]

According to the 4th down decision bot, there is no difference between leading by 14 or 17 which makes......absolutely no sense.

Digging in a bit further, it does appear that this is just an aggregate of all situations over a 10(ish) year period and does not account for situation, opponent, weather, etc.

[Havoc]

And that only gets you to a tie. There is still a greater than 50 pct chance SF wins at home in OT. Going for it on 4 and 2 was the right decision, even though outcome was wrong. If you could do a hundred Monte Carlo runs of this game it works out probably about 2/3 of the time.

Conversely you could argue that had he not taken the FG at the end of the half and had 7 they would have won.

This is on the receivers who choked under pressure.

Hindsight is easy and often wrong.

https://twitter.com/ben_bot_baldwin/sta ... s-vs-49ers

Dan Campbell is one of the best decision makers in the NFL:

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2023/9/2 ... y-4th-down

There is no decision if it's only a matter of pulling up the numbers and doing what it tells you to do.

Some baseball teams are moving away from so called analytics. The Texas Rangers did and if they had not done so, zero chance of getting the first world series championship in franchise history this season.

Former baseball players who aren't stupid are saying teams that are slaves to so called analytics need to cut it in half during the RS and pretty much scrap it in the PS.

Bruce Boche. Smart man. Is aware of the numbers (as he should) but also has the brains to know there is often more in play and makes GREAT decisions accordingly.

[Pabst]

There is no decision if it's only a matter of pulling up the numbers and doing what it tells you to do.

Some baseball teams are moving away from so called analytics. The Texas Rangers did and if they had not done so, zero chance of getting the first world series championship in franchise history this season.

Former baseball players who aren't stupid are saying teams that are slaves to so called analytics need to cut it in half during the RS and pretty much scrap it in the PS.

Bruce Boche. Smart man. Is aware of the numbers (as he should) but also has the brains to know there is often more in play and makes GREAT decisions accordingly.

Great example in the other direction - Billy Beane's A's consistently flopped in the playoffs.

[Dan Smith--BYU]

In baseball, it's a given that anything could happen in the playoffs. The Dodgers can vouch for that.

Billy Beane's teams don't even get there without analytics.

[Dan Smith--BYU]

Pabst, that's the wrong chart, their chances of winning were 26-28 pct at that point.

[Pabst]

Pabst, that's the wrong chart, their chances of winning were 26-28 pct at that point.

That's the chart from the 4th and 3 inside the 5 to end the first half. It's literally from the same twitter account you posted.

I wasn't commenting on Campbells decision, i was criticizing the methodology of the "4th down decision bot"

[955876]

And that only gets you to a tie. There is still a greater than 50 pct chance SF wins at home in OT. Going for it on 4 and 2 was the right decision, even though outcome was wrong. If you could do a hundred Monte Carlo runs of this game it works out probably about 2/3 of the time.

Conversely you could argue that had he not taken the FG at the end of the half and had 7 they would have won.

This is on the receivers who choked under pressure.

Hindsight is easy and often wrong.

https://twitter.com/ben_bot_baldwin/sta ... s-vs-49ers

Dan Campbell is one of the best decision makers in the NFL:

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2023/9/2 ... y-4th-down

I look at it differently.

You once again make it a 17 point game with that field goal and you're kicking off.

San Fran probably has to go 75 yards to score with ZERO momentum.

After that 4th down stop, the entire place was rockin'. Everybody and their mother knew that shit was changing.....and real fast, it was a 7 point game.

Not getting the first down there was a momentum shift that Detroit never recovered from.

I get they were going for the kill shot, but the risk there is exactly what happened. You don't convert that 4th down and not only is it still a 2 score game, but momentum has shifted completely and.....well, we all saw what happened.

Gotta pick your spots to go for the kill shot. That was not the time.

100% agree. On the road, facing an explosive team, you take the three score lead. Especially that late in the game.

[Pabst]

Billy Beane's teams don't even get there without analytics.

I'd actually disagree with that, at least to a degree. Billy Beans' teams don't get there without Mark Mulder, Barry Zito, Tim Hudson, Eric Chavez, Miguel Tejada, and Jermaine Dye. None of whom were selected/scouted using the moneyball method and all of those guys are conveniently not mentioned in the book or movie.

The overall point, however, is that analytics/sabremetrics/whatever you want to call it may work in the aggregate but can often fail in the short term.

[Dan Smith--BYU]

"The overall point, however, is that analytics/sabremetrics/whatever you want to call it may work in the aggregate but can often fail in the short term."

And no one in analytics would disagree with that. The issue is what gives you the best chance to win. Receivers who don't drop the ball help a lot more.

Again, if you have 17-20 in blackjack, dealer shows 6 and runs it to 21, that's not something you can control.

My bad on the chart, you were talking about the FG right before the half. Still, it proves the opposite of your point, that chart says go for it. Additionally the FG only increased their win chance by 2 pct, but a score would have by 12 pct.

[Pabst]

Still, it proves the opposite of your point, that chart says go for it.

The chart says there is no difference in winning probability between converting the FG (17 point lead) and failing on 4th down (14 point lead).

[Dan Smith--BYU]

Yes, which makes your argument even weaker, if anything Campbell wasn't aggressive enough.

The 79 must be a rounding error, I would like to see it to the tenth decimal.

[swissvale72]

And that only gets you to a tie. There is still a greater than 50 pct chance SF wins at home in OT. Going for it on 4 and 2 was the right decision, even though outcome was wrong. If you could do a hundred Monte Carlo runs of this game it works out probably about 2/3 of the time.

Conversely you could argue that had he not taken the FG at the end of the half and had 7 they would have won.

This is on the receivers who choked under pressure.

Hindsight is easy and often wrong.

https://twitter.com/ben_bot_baldwin/sta ... s-vs-49ers

Dan Campbell is one of the best decision makers in the NFL:

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2023/9/2 ... y-4th-down

I look at it differently.

You once again make it a 17 point game with that field goal and you're kicking off.

San Fran probably has to go 75 yards to score with ZERO momentum.

After that 4th down stop, the entire place was rockin'. Everybody and their mother knew that shit was changing.....and real fast, it was a 7 point game.

Not getting the first down there was a momentum shift that Detroit never recovered from.

I get they were going for the kill shot, but the risk there is exactly what happened. You don't convert that 4th down and not only is it still a 2 score game, but momentum has shifted completely and.....well, we all saw what happened.

Gotta pick your spots to go for the kill shot. That was not the time.

100% agree. On the road, facing an explosive team, you take the three score lead. Especially that late in the game.

That's where I am with this...when deciding, at home...lol...what the coach should decide..it's usually premised, in these situations, on whether the opponent will now be behind by another score. If it was 24-14 at the time, then go for it, but at 24-10, take the 3, same reason why taking the points before half was a sound decision.

[Pabst]

Yes, which makes your argument even weaker, if anything Campbell wasn't aggressive enough.

The 79 must be a rounding error, I would like to see it to the tenth decimal.

My argument is that the chart is horseshit and literally everyone can tell you that a 3 possession lead is better than a 2 possession lead.

This is the problem with this (and similar) data - It makes no distinction between a garbage team like Arizona holding a 17 point halftime lead over an elite offense in Week 6 of 2018 vs a Good team like Detroit holding a 17 point lead in a Conference Title Game. The aggregate numbers are pulling in data that isn't very relevant to the situation at hand.

It's a perfect example of not seeing the forest through the trees. Coaches need to do better than point to numbers on a spreadsheet.