The Rest of Week 12 Game Thread

Sox and Rocks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2013
5,871
Northern Colorado
Given the strength of Denver's kicker and the altitude, the odds of making that kick are better than the odds of converting on 4th and long (wasn't it 4th and 10?), right? You also have to factor in Denver's relatively weak offense (though they had been playing better towards the end of the game) and Kansas City's strong defense. The other factor is that a first down doesn't end the game, while a field goal does. Thus, even if they convert the 4th down, they still have to gain more yards and/or convert a field goal attempt.

I agree that punting and playing for the tie is not an option there. Thus, I think Kubiak made the right call.
 

Red Right Ankle

Formerly the Story of Your Red Right Ankle
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
12,004
Multivac
Yeah, I'd love to see a breakdown by someone much smarter than myself as I'm having trouble trying to actually calculate the percentages here. I think the kick was dumb, but going for it on 4th would have been a much smarter move than punting would have. The division (and thus bye) is very much in play with a win and very unlikely with a tie. I think this outweighs their current position on the outside of the playoffs given that a. they play KC again and b. even with a tougher schedule, they're more likely to win out than Miami. You'd obviously be in better shape with a tie than a loss, but not so much so that essentially conceding the division would have made sense. Maybe I'm missing a tiebreaker somewhere or am overestimating the chances the Raiders would have holding a 1.5 game lead, but if I were a Broncos fan I would have wanted to give Sanders or Thomas a chance to move the chains.
Here's a link to an article with a chart on 4th down conversion rates by number of yards needed to convert and field position (it's about midway down the page):

http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/index.php/home/research/game-strategy/120-4th-down-study

10 yards to go, outside the 20 is about a 35% conversion rate on average according to this chart.
 

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
19,926
Henderson, NV
Yeah, I'd love to see a breakdown by someone much smarter than myself as I'm having trouble trying to actually calculate the percentages here. I think the kick was dumb, but going for it on 4th would have been a much smarter move than punting would have. The division (and thus bye) is very much in play with a win and very unlikely with a tie. I think this outweighs their current position on the outside of the playoffs given that a. they play KC again and b. even with a tougher schedule, they're more likely to win out than Miami. You'd obviously be in better shape with a tie than a loss, but not so much so that essentially conceding the division would have made sense. Maybe I'm missing a tiebreaker somewhere or am overestimating the chances the Raiders would have holding a 1.5 game lead, but if I were a Broncos fan I would have wanted to give Sanders or Thomas a chance to move the chains.
Barnwell covered this today. Whether or not he's smarter than you, you will have to decide.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,670
Hingham, MA
Bill Barnwell wrote about it today. He ultimately concluded that kicking was likely the correct decision, but it wasn't clear cut.

Personally I would have punted and taken the tie (and who knows, maybe Alex Smith forces something and the Denver D wins the game anyway like they have in the past). It wouldn't have been a popular decision but it would give them a better chance at winning the division than kicking the FG, IMO.

As Barnwell wrote, the real mistake was the play calling prior to the missed FG. They should have run more conservative plays that would have at least chewed up the rest of the clock.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I think they are drawing close to dead in the division with a tie.

Barnwell still thought they should have been calling plays to advance the ball rather than one clock, just would have called higher percentage passes. I think that's probably right, but not as much because it kills the clock as because the options are much better if you are five yards closer.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,670
Hingham, MA
I think they are drawing close to dead in the division with a tie.
Right, it would have required them to beat Oakland head to head plus pick up an additional game on them.

And as Barnwell pointed out, the division is especially important to that team given Mile High. Doubt that factored into the decision but they were going for the gold, so to speak.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Learned something new about the rules, apparently per the NFL you cant do the hold everyone play twice in a row or else it should be deemed a palpably unfair act. Doesnt matter for the Ravens loophole, but does matter for the hold everyone at the end of a half on defense loophole as the refs can just award a TD if a team does it twice.
 

Cousin Walter01

New Member
Nov 6, 2015
33
So after the Butler INT in SBXLIX, could the Pats purposely refuse to snap the ball and take delay of game penalties ad infinitum or would that be deemed palpably unfair as well?
 

speedracer

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,837
So after the Butler INT in SBXLIX, could the Pats purposely refuse to snap the ball and take delay of game penalties ad infinitum or would that be deemed palpably unfair as well?
Clock wouldn't run, right?

I do kind of wonder what would happen if a team defending its 1 yard line kept jumping offside (and canning the center to prevent a clean snap) and drawing epsilon-yard penalties in the hope of eventually getting the offense to false start. How many fouls would it take for the refs to award an automatic TD?
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
59,380
San Andreas Fault
these two defenses: one is a sieve and the other a collander, or, as my Godmother said in a store when she didn't know the English name, "water go, spaghetti stop".
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,562
And another team wastes a timeout instead of just taking the delay when you're punting anyway.

McCarthy just one more idiot in a league of them.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
59,380
San Andreas Fault
GB player didn't have to do anything and the ball would have been on the one yard line. Instead, he comes in all hero like and turns it into a safety (maybe).

Touchback, but it wasn't.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 22, 2008
36,123
How is that not intentional grounding? Ball didn't reach the LOS.

Probably doesn't make a difference -- GB almost certainly would've hit the 40-41 yard FG.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 22, 2008
36,123
Did Lisa Salters just report on Aaron Rodgers taking a shit?
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire / Axl's Counter
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
8,927
Wayne, NJ
I liked the Philly challenge to get a second and ten instead of a second and eight.

They win the challenge and use their last challenge.

As stupid or even more obtuse than the above taking a timeout to avoid delay of game before a punt.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
59,380
San Andreas Fault
I liked the Philly challenge to get a second and ten instead of a second and eight.

They win the challenge and use their last challenge.

As stupid or even more obtuse than the above taking a timeout to avoid delay of game before a punt.
The challenge was apparently burning a hole in the Eagles coach's pocket.
 

Sox and Rocks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2013
5,871
Northern Colorado
I liked the Philly challenge to get a second and ten instead of a second and eight.

They win the challenge and use their last challenge.

As stupid or even more obtuse than the above taking a timeout to avoid delay of game before a punt.
This was one of the dumbest decisions I've ever seen. Coaches make millions and work 15-20 hours a day preparing for games only to do dumb shit like this. Boggles the mind.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Its why the argument that gets floated about sometimes that game management is such a small portion of the job is amusing at the extremes. To crib a response I've seen elsewhere: Its absolutely true, most fans including myself are dumb as rocks about X's and O's, and these guys kill themselves working inhumane hours, but what the fuck is the point of doing all that if you are going to light all of it on fire by doing stuff like burning a challenge on a two yard pass on first down?
 

Sox and Rocks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2013
5,871
Northern Colorado
Its why the argument that gets floated about sometimes that game management is such a small portion of the job is amusing at the extremes. To crib a response I've seen elsewhere: Its absolutely true, most fans including myself are dumb as rocks about X's and O's, and these guys kill themselves working inhumane hours, but what the fuck is the point of doing all that if you are going to light all of it on fire by doing stuff like burning a challenge on a two yard pass on first down?
Exactly. Hire someone with common sense for 50 grand a year to say, "don't do that, coach."