Talk about the NFL

[JazzNU]

[JazzNU]

Wow...quite a lot worse than they were making it out to be yesterday. On SNF Tirico and Dungy were trying to playing it up like it wasn't a big deal. Of course, Tirico was his play by play man at the time, so that probably didn't mean much.

Good riddance.

Dungy was disappointing, but not surprising. It didn't go over well.

No one gives a ish what Tirico is saying. I'm surprised he said a damn thing last night. One might think he was trying to vouch for him as a black co-worker, but that can't be. Can't vouch as a black man when you can't admit you're a Black man. He's just Italian. If you're not aware, sadly, this is not a joke.

[JazzNU]

[ponchi101]

That missed 4 & 1 call last night will loom large.
You are 4-1 in the season, look like a serious contender for the SB. But you have to keep pace with Baltimore, who are looking strong, and now you find yourself 4-2, one game behind, and having given the Titans a lot of air.
The cost-benefit was too skewed towards kicking the field goal and trying to win in OT. Some new coaches are too aggressive (and I think McDermont is a good coach).

[JazzNU]

I don't think they need to truly keep pace with the Ravens. Maybe it'll start to even out, but the Ravens thus far, though very impressive, have been eeking out wins. Now if someone besides Lamar can help the team, maybe that'll change and their wins will start to look like they did against the Chargers.

The Bills, they have the strange loss to the Steelers to start the season, but if we consider that an outlier as most are doing from just being rusty, they've been blowing out their opponents. Yesterday was their first close game. They basically lost it because Josh lost his footing in the grass, but is almost always solid on plays like that. They still play in the AFC East and the Ravens play in the AFC North.

Ravens will be the ones that need to keep pace with the Bills, not vice versa. Not great to lose, but not the end of the world. No one talks about how the Patriots were gifted their playoff spot year after year because of the AFC East, but they were and the Bills have slid into that spot for the foreseeable future.

[ponchi101]

That they are making the playoffs is a given. With NE, MIA and NYJ, they can have Allen throw left handed and they will make it.
But I do believe that home field in the NFL is very important. If they are one game behind the Ravens when the playoffs start, it means that extra game, and maybe facing KC. Who will always be able to explode for one game.
I also don't think that this new "GO FOR IT" mentality is totally appropriate. It can cost way too much at times.

[JazzNU]

I also don't think that this new "GO FOR IT" mentality is totally appropriate. It can cost way too much at times.

Analytics run amok.

[ptmcmahon]

Pretending overtime is a 50-50 proposition... for that to have been the right call they needed a better than 50% chance to convert on 4th and 1 with Josh Allen. I didn't see an exact statistic on it, but I'm guessing it's more than 50% (Buffalo overall was 83% of 4th down in 2020 for example, and some were more than 4th and 1 I'm sure.) So I think it's quite clearly the right call. If they kick the field goal instead its just as possible the kicker slips like Josh Allen did on the play. Mistakes happen.

People who think analytics are running amok and that it cost too much are probably not remembering all the times where it does work out. The failures are much more noticeable than the successes. If he had converted no one would have been saying they thought it was a mistake. If they had tied it and then lost in overtime, no one would be saying not going for it was a mistake either (except me and the stat heads.)

[ponchi101]

But the stats have to take into consideration the end result of the play too. Going for it on 4&1 at the end of the first quarter, on the opposite team's 45 yd line and missing means simply that you gave your opponent good field position. It is a reasonable gamble. Going for it here was basically the game, which was what happened. Failure to complete the play meant 100% chance of losing the game while, as you say, kicking the field goal would have given them 50% chance of winning in OT.
The NFL site actually has the stat. It stands, currently, at 4th down conversion = 3/8. That means that before that last one, it stood at 3/7. Sure, a small sample (because the Bills have been blowing opponents away) but they went for it, with the game on the line, on a 43% chance of making it. Even less than the 50% we agree would have been the chance in OT. Their kicker has made 14/15, for a 93% success rate. Therefore, the FG meant 93% x 50% = 46%, still higher (by a bit) than the 4th down rate.
And I agree. The failures are more memorable than the successes, and if they had scored McDermott would have been hailed as genial. But they didn't and, for example, they now are ranked around 8th in the league in the power rankings while you know that, at 5-1 and with a five game winning streak, they would be top three (Arizona, Baltimore and them, in some order).
I still say that if it comes down to BAL/BUF by the end of the season in some sort of 14/3 vs 13/4 record, and Baltimore gets the bye, this will have cost them too much.

[JazzNU]

People who think analytics are running amok and that it cost too much are probably not remembering all the times where it does work out. The failures are much more noticeable than the successes. If he had converted no one would have been saying they thought it was a mistake. If they had tied it and then lost in overtime, no one would be saying not going for it was a mistake either (except me and the stat heads.)

I don't know what sports news cycle you live in, but if they had gone for it and made it but lost in overtime, all they would've been talking about is "should they have gone for it on 4th and 1 and tried to win in regulation." Completely inaccurate to pretend otherwise, there's over-analysis every single time, they've got 16 hours of TV and radio to fill the next day and that is going to be the focus regardless.

My statement stands. Stats should be but one tool that is used, not the be all and end all it has become and it is well deserved of the criticism it gets.

[ptmcmahon]

Ok let me rephrase... I can guarantee if they had kicked field goal and lost in overtime, no one HERE would have said they should have gone for it...unless someone else brought it up and I mentioned it

The NFL site actually has the stat. It stands, currently, at 4th down conversion = 3/8. That means that before that last one, it stood at 3/7. Sure, a small sample (because the Bills have been blowing opponents away) but they went for it, with the game on the line, on a 43% chance of making it. Even less than the 50% we agree would have been the chance in OT. Their kicker has made 14/15, for a 93% success rate. Therefore, the FG meant 93% x 50% = 46%, still higher (by a bit) than the 4th down rate.

Is that just for Buffalo this year? Small sample size and probably not all 4th and 1. I think we both agree there is a much better chance of Allen making a 4th and 1 than 43%

[ponchi101]

I like football but I certainly do not know enough to say about Allen making a 4&1 and gauging the stats.
Again, I will only assume the situation. At 4&1, those close to the goal line, the defensive line of the Titans was packed, because, of course, there is no more space behind them. So that was stacked against the Bills. Plus, everybody knows that Allen is a good runner, so I guess that the Titans were very much alert on that play.
The sample is too small to make it statistically significant. For example, had they made it, they would not stand t 4/8 (50%) as opposed to 3/8 (37.5%). I am sure that some people would read the stat wrong and say "wow, a 12.5% difference" when in reality it is only one success/failure differential. In that aspect, you are correct that you would need to look at a longer series.

[ptmcmahon]

Yeah, I would think the 83% from 2020 a better gauge statistically. Either way, for me it seems (in general, not necessarily this one situation) people playing the "stats cost them that game" card are usually doing it when the stats say to do something aggressive. The NFL is definitely a play it safe league. Much more acceptable to play "not to lose" (ie just kick the field goal) than to "play to win" (ie let your players try to make a play to win and if they don't then you lose.)

Those most famous one was when New England went for it on fourth down and two in their own territory in the fourth quarter. They of course didn't make it and gave Peyton Manning a short field for the winning score. Of course if they had punted it, they are still giving Manning the ball, just with a bigger field - and statistically they still had a good chance to win even with a longer field. So I was immediately good with their decision to go for it even though especially in that case everyone who talked about it after was not. Easy for people to pile on when it doesn't work even if more times than not it's the correct play, in my books at least. A decision shouldn't be considered the wrong one only after it doesn't work out.

And everytime I think of that I think... oh man, I am defending the Patriots!

[ponchi101]

...

Those most famous one was when New England went for it on fourth down and two in their own territory in the fourth quarter. They of course didn't make it and gave Peyton Manning a short field for the winning score. Of course if they had punted it, they are still giving Manning the ball, just with a bigger field - and statistically they still had a good chance to win even with a longer field. So I was immediately good with their decision to go for it even though especially in that case everyone who talked about it after was not. Easy for people to pile on when it doesn't work even if more times than not it's the correct play, in my books at least. A decision shouldn't be considered the wrong one only after it doesn't work out.

And everytime I think of that I think... oh man, I am defending the Patriots!

Of course, you will have to trust me on this one but, the moment they lined up to go for it I thought "I hope they are only trying to force a hard count, because it will not work".

[ptmcmahon]

Oh yeah I believe you. Seems a lot of announcers, media, etc will say it's bad after it fails...especially the original New England example.

I will say despite me not liking that he always wants to see the conservative play, Troy Aikman is the one announcer who will immediately say "I don't like this" right away before the play, so I have to give him credit for not waiting to see how it plays out. I also don't think I've seen him agree with a single two point conversion ever, unless you're down by 2 with no time left