You’re doing better against the Chiefs than anybody thought you would especially with a backup QB. Nobody would fault you if you went for it and it didn’t work out. If I’m a Charger enthusiast, I’d be pissed. That was a gutless call. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
And in 4-down territory because they know what they have to manage.
So unless you're Lynn and you think you can drive down for a TD, you have to figure it's a foregone conclusion that Mahomes w/ 4 downs the entire way, will be able to get them at least back into FG range.
You're gonna risk a 4th down play where you have about a 90% chance of losing if you fail for THAT?
The reward just wasn't great enough. It isn't just that the Chiefs get it so close to scoring, but that even a conversion leaves you a damn long ways away from a W still.
Lynn made the right decision, IMO.
Well if he went for it and didn't get it, they would've questioned the decision the same way. I can hear these same douche nozzle tv guys that are criticizing the decision saying "Your defense played a great game and held the Kansas City Chiefs to 20 points and you're gonna disrespect them by going for it on your own 30 yard line?!?!"
I guess no matter what they did, the Chiefs are just better at winning football games than they are. [Reply]
I thought it was a bad decision and shows why Lynn will never be a winning head coach. We won't get lucky this up coming week with such ineptitude. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
That's where Lynn truly screwed the pooch, IMO.
Lynn didn't find out until a few minutes before kickoff that Taylor would not be available to play, so he was forced to start a rookie QB that did not have the benefit of spending the previous 4 months in the building, that did not participate in OTA's, Rookie Minicamp or Minicamp.
IMO, keeping it "vanilla" was the smartest move because had they asked Herbert to do something he was unfamiliar doing, the game may have ended right then and there.
Lynn made a call that gave him the best probability of winning, which was the smart call, especially considering had it failed or had the ball been turned over, there was no chance of winning from that point on. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Except that a roulette wheel is random chance. Failing on short yardage is a combination of energy, talent and execution. Past performance is the best indicator of future results. You can't just claim a gambler's fallacy in a skill-based situation.
Again - they'd failed in exactly that scenario repeatedly and all you want to say is "Well it's still 90% likely they'd have picked it up..."
Based on what? You have absolutely no support for that argument. You gonna try to say "they were due" and pretend that's not exactly the kind of thing you're arguing against right now?
And again, even if they do convert, THEN what? They have 60+ yards to go to score when they'd put up zero touchdowns since the first half.
The end result very clearly wasn't worth the risk.
Originally Posted by BWillie:
Just because they hadn't been very successful that day on short yardage doesn't mean that same percentage would carry over to this decision. There is absolutely no way they had a 90% chance of not picking it up.
That is like watching the roulette history and seeing it's hit red four times in a row, so deciding to bet on red. It's fools bet.
Comparing a roulette wheel to football is downright laughable, dude. Come on. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
I thought it was a bad decision and shows why Lynn will never be a winning head coach. We won't get lucky this up coming week with such ineptitude.
The Chargers were 12-4 in 2018 and beat the Ravens in the playoffs. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
Lynn didn't find out until a few minutes before kickoff that Taylor would not be available to play, so he was forced to start a rookie QB that did not have the benefit of spending the previous 4 months in the building, that did not participate in OTA's, Rookie Minicamp or Minicamp.
IMO, keeping it "vanilla" was the smartest move because had they asked Herbert to do something he was unfamiliar doing, the game may have ended right then and there.
Lynn made a call that gave him the best probability of winning, which was the smart call, especially considering had it failed or had the ball been turned over, there was no chance of winning from that point on.
But Herbert had been finding guys underneath and out in the flats all day.
I'm not saying he shouldn't have kicked the FG there - once 3rd failed, kicking away was the right play. But take a high percentage, low risk, play-action shot at some point on those first 3 plays.
If nothing else, you dial up something that gives Herbert a roll-out on the play-fake to allow him to use his legs if nothing opens up; afterall he ran the first one in. Worst case scenario is he gets sacked and you have a FG from the 8 instead of the 4. I don't think you have to presume he'd screw up ANYTHING he'd have tried there, especially not when he'd made some damn nice reads/throws in that game to that point.
Give him one shot. I just think it's so easy to protect from a disaster scenario in there that you had to do it once. From a 'coaching not to lose' standpoint, that was easily a worse sequence than the decision to punt in OT. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
Lynn didn't find out until a few minutes before kickoff that Taylor would not be available to play, so he was forced to start a rookie QB that did not have the benefit of spending the previous 4 months in the building, that did not participate in OTA's, Rookie Minicamp or Minicamp.
IMO, keeping it "vanilla" was the smartest move because had they asked Herbert to do something he was unfamiliar doing, the game may have ended right then and there.
Lynn made a call that gave The Chiefs the best probability of winning, which was the smart call, especially considering had it failed or had the ball been turned over, there was no chance of winning from that point on.
How many of us (probably all of us) saw them get to about midfield and said/thought "okay, just hold 'em to a FG and at worst Mahomes gets us to OT...."
Did ANYONE think of that FG as a loss for us? And again, on 4th down I'd have absolutely done the same thing because you have to take the lead there with your defense playing like that.
But man, I think you have to dial up something before it gets to 3rd down that has more upshot than a basic lead play. Allow some kind of read/respond play because there was truly little chance for individual effort on anybody on SD's part changing the outcome of any of those first 3 plays. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
The Chargers were 12-4 in 2018 and beat the Ravens in the playoffs.
His record is 27-24 so he is barely over .500. I think it was a stupid decision IMO and we can all expect next Monday night the Ravens are going to go for every 4th down that they can. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Give him one shot. I just think it's so easy to protect from a disaster scenario in there that you had to do it once. From a 'coaching not to lose' standpoint, that was easily a worse sequence than the decision to punt in OT.
I don't disagree, I just have a difficult time assigning blame to a coach who was forced to start a rookie that had never appeared in an NFL preseason game ,let alone, his first start in a week in which he didn't take any 1st team reps.
The scary part is that Herbert played well, despite his complete lack of NFL experience. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
His record is 27-24 so he is barely over .500. I think it was a stupid decision IMO and we can all expect next Monday night the Ravens are going to go for every 4th down that they can.
All anyone ever does is congratulate coaches for going for it on 4th downs. They get an attaboy for being aggressive even when it fails.
It's almost certainly how the Ravens put themselves in a hole they couldn't dig out of against the Titans in the playoffs last year. 2 failed 4th and 1 plays w/ the best running QB in NFL history on their roster. Both situations where someone would've said there's a 90% chance of conversion.
It's strange to me how outcomes get ignored on 4th down plays. When you just ignore the 'risk' part of the equation it sure makes it easy to say it's smart to go for it on 4th down. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Except that a roulette wheel is random chance. Failing on short yardage is a combination of energy, talent and execution. Past performance is the best indicator of future results. You can't just claim a gambler's fallacy in a skill-based situation.
Again - they'd failed in exactly that scenario repeatedly and all you want to say is "Well it's still 90% likely they'd have picked it up..."
Based on what? You have absolutely no support for that argument. You gonna try to say "they were due" and pretend that's not exactly the kind of thing you're arguing against right now?
And again, even if they do convert, THEN what? They have 60+ yards to go to score when they'd put up zero touchdowns since the first half.
The end result very clearly wasn't worth the risk.
Long term statistical information. Utilizing a few prior drives as empirical evidence that they will fail or succeed THIS TIME is not statistically significant. It lacks sample size. I know coaches and fans like to rely on this as it is emotional and a "feeling in the gut" but it is not very relevant. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
His record is 27-24 so he is barely over .500. I think it was a stupid decision IMO and we can all expect next Monday night the Ravens are going to go for every 4th down that they can.
Anthony Lynn is a good NFL coach stuck in the unenviable position of being in the same division as a Hall of Fame Coach and maybe the greatest NFL QB of all time.
Before last season, his head coaching record with the Chargers was 21-11.
It's not his fault that the Chargers ownership and GM held onto Philip Rivers for too long. [Reply]