NFL Thread 2026-2027

#176      
AnnoyedWithGarza
Curbelo Fanboy said:
They got away with it cause the Green Bay kicker sucked but if I'm weighing options I'd much rather punt & then make green bay drive 50/60 yards to get into field goal range. I realize there is a risk they drain the clock doing that. But at least you've made them do something. The call he made left Green Bay in a spot where a competent kicker would have given them the lead after 3 plays & 2 yards gained. Essentially nothing.

I'd always rather make the other guy do something to beat me. And if he does go shake his hand when it ends than just giving it away. Sometimes the crazy risk works out but the more you make the other team do the harder it is going to be for them to do it.
Click to expand...
The problem with that line of thinking is that a good QB does this almost automatically to you in the NFL. Now you could make the argument that Love has proven to not be up to that task recently and therefore make him prove it.

Detroit's defense is not good.

This way, you maximize your possessions. If you make it then your drive continues, and you believe that you will go down and score, while simultaneously running the clock out. If you do not get it then they score quickly enough that you can counter.

He believes that his QB is good enough to make it into the end zone if needed. They would have gotten away with it either way, seeing as they stopped themselves from scoring twice in order to run the clock out.

I like the ball in my team's hands at the end of the game.
 
#178      
Curbelo Fanboy
Grandpa said:
You are correct
Click to expand...
I suspect there is an age component in this discussion. I presume with a user name like Grandpa you are north of 50 like me. I'm an accountant so I understand the numbers & analytics arguments. I just don't buy em in every situation. I'm sure I have an age bias where part of me just hates it cause that isn't the way they played football in 1985. But I'll never understand the thought process that goes into a decision like what he made in the situation I described. Earlier in the game he went for it on 4th & 5 from the GB 6 yard line. Didn't get that one either but that doesn't bother me as much (still bothersome) cause at least you leave Green Bay deep in their own end if you don't score.

It just seems some of these analytics based decisions don't always factor in time/score/how the game is being played that day into their decision making. That game was in the 4th quarter tied at 24. By no means a shootout. Points were not free flowing. Take the freebies & go on. If the game was a 45-45 shootout I might have a different thought.

For example in that infamous IL vs Michigan game in 2010 that ended like 67-65, there was a sequence late in the 3rd quarter where IL had it 4th & inches at the Mich 18 in a game where both teams were already over 40 points. No one was stopping anything that day. In that spot the right call was to go for it. Predictably the Zooker elected to try a 35 yard field goal which was missed. The point is game situation, game style and similar factors should play into the decision calculus. It seems Dan Campbell's thought process is just GO FOR IT, regardless of the factors involved.
 
#179      
Lee
Grandpa said:
You are correct
Click to expand...
Morgan Freeman Quote GIF
 
#180      
AnnoyedWithGarza
Curbelo Fanboy said:
I suspect there is an age component in this discussion. I presume with a user name like Grandpa you are north of 50 like me. I'm an accountant so I understand the numbers & analytics arguments. I just don't buy em in every situation. I'm sure I have an age bias where part of me just hates it cause that isn't the way they played football in 1985. But I'll never understand the thought process that goes into a decision like what he made in the situation I described. Earlier in the game he went for it on 4th & 5 from the GB 6 yard line. Didn't get that one either but that doesn't bother me as much (still bothersome) cause at least you leave Green Bay deep in their own end if you don't score.

It just seems some of these analytics based decisions don't always factor in time/score/how the game is being played that day into their decision making. That game was in the 4th quarter tied at 24. By no means a shootout. Points were not free flowing. Take the freebies & go on. If the game was a 45-45 shootout I might have a different thought.

For example in that infamous IL vs Michigan game in 2010 that ended like 67-65, there was a sequence late in the 3rd quarter where IL had it 4th & inches at the Mich 18 in a game where both teams were already over 40 points. No one was stopping anything that day. In that spot the right call was to go for it. Predictably the Zooker elected to try a 35 yard field goal which was missed. The point is game situation, game style and similar factors should play into the decision calculus. It seems Dan Campbell's thought process is just GO FOR IT, regardless of the factors involved.
Click to expand...
The analytics definitely take into account the time/score. I don't believe there is any way you can quantify how the game is being played, though I'm sure someone will try.

Again, all these analytics are doing is showing how to maximize the number of possessions, therefore giving you more opportunities to score, therefore giving a higher percentage chance to win the game.

I have a feeling that Campbell's thought process is:

"My offense is better than your team."
"I don't want them to have the ball last."
"If we don't get it, we will get the ball back and score."

Should the Jets be using this thought process? Absolutely not.
Should dominate defensive teams be thinking this way i.e. Seattle? Absolutely not. Detroit is not Seattle on defense.
Should the higher-level offenses in the NFL be thinking (they are and they are winning) this way? Absolutely.

The game is changing to be offense-centric, and field position does not matter nearly as much as when we grew up.
 
#181      
Grandpa
Curbelo Fanboy said:
I suspect there is an age component in this discussion. I presume with a user name like Grandpa you are north of 50 like me. I'm an accountant so I understand the numbers & analytics arguments. I just don't buy em in every situation. I'm sure I have an age bias where part of me just hates it cause that isn't the way they played football in 1985. But I'll never understand the thought process that goes into a decision like what he made in the situation I described. Earlier in the game he went for it on 4th & 5 from the GB 6 yard line. Didn't get that one either but that doesn't bother me as much (still bothersome) cause at least you leave Green Bay deep in their own end if you don't score.

It just seems some of these analytics based decisions don't always factor in time/score/how the game is being played that day into their decision making. That game was in the 4th quarter tied at 24. By no means a shootout. Points were not free flowing. Take the freebies & go on. If the game was a 45-45 shootout I might have a different thought.

For example in that infamous IL vs Michigan game in 2010 that ended like 67-65, there was a sequence late in the 3rd quarter where IL had it 4th & inches at the Mich 18 in a game where both teams were already over 40 points. No one was stopping anything that day. In that spot the right call was to go for it. Predictably the Zooker elected to try a 35 yard field goal which was missed. The point is game situation, game style and similar factors should play into the decision calculus. It seems Dan Campbell's thought process is just GO FOR IT, regardless of the factors involved.
Click to expand...
Late in a tie game you don't go for it if not making it leaves the other team in field goal range. I mean duh!
 
#182      
ChiefGritty
Gardner Minshew is really one of the iconic backup QB's of all time at this point

(Ryan Fitzpatrick is stolen valor, he was QB1 for most of his career)
 
Last edited:
Back