Week 16 Game Thread

amfox1

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
6,827
The back of your computer
Ferm Sheller said:
So we're rooting for Pitt to win next week and take the 3 seed, leaving Cincy and Indy at 4 and 5? Pitt beats the 6 seed at home and the winner of Indy/Cincy comes to NE to get slaughtered?
Click to expand...
 
Either that, or for SD to win the wild card, beat PIT and come to NE to get slaughtered.
 
Erik Hanson's Hook

Erik Hanson's Hook

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2013
1,081
ShaneTrot said:
What has happened to the Denver defense? They were stellar earlier this season. 
Click to expand...
 
With Trevathan and Marshall both injured, they are thin at LB. If Ward is out for any extended period of time, they are close to decimated up the middle.
 
Don't really fear this team at all anymore.
 
jercra

jercra

No longer respects DeChambeau
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
3,152
Arvada, Co
Dan to Theo to Ben said:
GO BAMA!
 
Should have kicked the FG with the 2 TO's (Would get ball back with 15-20 seconds if fail to get onsides, hope for dpi thereafter)
Click to expand...
The guys next to me in the bar were saying the same thing and I fail to understand how this makes any sense.  It was first and 10 from the Cinci 19.  How can it possibly be more likely to get the required touchdown from somewhere further back than than the 19 and requiring an onside kick?  Am I missing something?
 
Dollar

Dollar

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2006
11,103
jercra said:
The guys next to me in the bar were saying the same thing and I fail to understand how this makes any sense.  It was first and 10 from the Cinci 19.  How can it possibly be more likely to get the required touchdown from somewhere further back than than the 19 and requiring an onside kick?  Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
 
I don't think you're missing anything, it never made sense to me either, and I've been hearing it all the time lately. 
 
The announcers in the Falcons-Saints game were yelling at the Saints to kick a 45-yard FG with on 1st and 10 with 1:05 left down 9 points.  That one looks good in retrospect (the Saints ended up bleeding the clock dry with a couple short passes in the middle of the field, followed by a long Falcons fumble return for a TD), but you have to go for the touchdown when you have good field position, and hope for a long FG later after the onside kick. 
 
And if the only argument is "well, you can always hope for a DPI flag later", why not just throw it into the end zone and get a flag now? 
 
Super Nomario

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,024
Mansfield MA
Papelbon's Poutine said:
The general idea is that you can throw a TD pass from further out than you can kick a field goal. If the last play is your chance to win, you're better off throwing a bomb from midfield than trying a 65 yd Fg. Or a Music City miracle lateral or whatever.

So you kick the FG, preserve as much time as possible and go onside kick. If they had done that there would have been ~1:20 left and all three time outs left. (You could see that was what Peyton was expecting - as he came to the line he looked to the sideline and made a spiking motion, presumably that they would go this route and preserve their timeouts; you also heard Gruden say it too on the broadcast). Even if they had scored on the play he threw the pick, they would have had ~1:10-1:15 and two timeouts. Much less time left if it took a couple tries. 
 
They still need another score either way, but less time and less timeouts, plus the scoring play to win needs to be significantly closer if its a FG. 
 
Edit: and yes, there's always the hope for DPI or another defensive penalty that gives you a second shot at a last play. Simplified idea is if you need two scores, you take one as soon as you can get it with reasonable certainty. 
Click to expand...
This only makes sense to me if you're going to have so little time left after the onside kick that there's no chance of getting in FG range. I'd rather have the ball after an onside kick with 30 seconds left only needing a field goal than have it after an onside kick with 1:20 left needing a touchdown. Has the "kick the field goal / onside / hail mary touchdown" sequence ever worked?
 
Stitch01

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
They didn't need to kick the field goal there, but using the timeout was atrocious.

I think Kicking the field goal would have been pretty bad. They were already deep and had all three timeouts and 105 left or so if they spiked it. Better off taking two shots at the end zone while already deep in Bengal territory. With the TOs they had plenty of time to work with post onside kick
 
Jnai

Jnai

is not worried about sex with goats
SoSH Member
Sep 15, 2007
16,144
<null>
I doubt this actually played into the decision all that much, but since we're discussing the strategy of whether or not to kick in that situation, does the rainstorm affect the decision here? It was a driving rain that almost certainly wasn't going to get any worse and made it very challenging to kick fieldgoals. If there was any chance it might be better in 10m, you might as well leave the field goal for later.
 
8slim

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,945
Unreal America
Kick the FG? Please, we don't need yet another reason to make math-averse, ultra-conservative football coaches even more stupid and conservative.
 
jercra

jercra

No longer respects DeChambeau
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
3,152
Arvada, Co
I don't know anything about the guys at the linked site but they performed 30k simulations to see the scoring probabilities for kicking the FG first or going for the TD.
 
http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/index.php/home/research/game-strategy/155-field-goal-first
 
In short, it's basically a wash, though slightly weighted towards kicking the FG first.  The important part of their simulation though is that the offensive team has to have at least 2 timeouts because the basis of the analysis is that you have to avoid the onside kick.  So you kick the FG, punt, force 3 and out (using your timeouts), then go for the TD.  It's a pretty interesting read and the comments clarify a few questions about the simulator.
 
StupendousMan

StupendousMan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,925
jercra said:
I don't know anything about the guys at the linked site but they performed 30k simulations to see the scoring probabilities for kicking the FG first or going for the TD.
 
http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/index.php/home/research/game-strategy/155-field-goal-first
 
In short, it's basically a wash, though slightly weighted towards kicking the FG first.  The important part of their simulation though is that the offensive team has to have at least 2 timeouts because the basis of the analysis is that you have to avoid the onside kick.  So you kick the FG, punt, force 3 and out (using your timeouts), then go for the TD.  It's a pretty interesting read and the comments clarify a few questions about the simulator.
Click to expand...
 
Ah, so that's the secret.
 
A

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,136
Kind of interesting, the NFL has waived the 'no game on the other network opposite a home game in a local market' rule for Week 17, meaning that Fox will have a game in the Boston area at 1 PM.
 
M

MentalDisabldLst

Guest
i think that happens every year for week 17. it's part of the usual deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom