NoSaint

Dont the bengals only employ like 3 scouts and half are ownership family members (slightly exaggerated but only slightly from when he started- I think a real staff now)

All nice but without knowing their playbooks we are really just guessing on guys like this - it’s not just play calling but play design and then scheme building

One of the streaming services signed at a large increase this week. We will see on the tv front.

Agreed. Its one of those stats that makes such a difference too. I think I heard the announcer say the eagles were 12-12 in 3rd or 4th and 1 situations this year? The pats are likewise consistently above average. Converting 4 and 1 is essentially manufacturing a turnover and I think we can all agree on how important the turnover battle is.

Oh jeeze— I appreciate you actually adding the context to your stance here. I think we are so far off on philosophy that it’s probably just agree to disagree here. The benefit of a punt from the 27 is just so non-existent in my philosophy...

Let’s hope that’s not true. Rarely does a guy say “got that one wrong!” but sometimes you see a guy change his call in the future

Come on happy- give me this one... where do you pull the trigger and go for it? Or do you punt until a field goal, and at what yard line do you make that call?

I agree that that it doesn’t define his career. and he got away with it. but I hope that’s considered a mistake and not a philosophy that defines his approach

I’m still curious at what yard line you would go for it, happy or Shaw? 35? 30? Not until you are confident you make the fg (and where is that?) also, if you miss at the 40, what do you think the odds of the colts scoring are?

Thats why I want the coach trying to end yesterday with an 11% chance, and not content with 3% cause at least we didn’t get knocked out (or whatever those numbers were) And ill keep echoing that missing doesn’t mean you lose. If you are betting on the defense to force a 3 and out you sure as hell should be betting they won’t give up 40 yards for a shot at a risky kick

I’m not assuming a loss to New England but I’m also not assuming we win 3 in a row for the first time all year AND get all the help we need. And again, this is relatively low risk (even if you miss the cost is low), high reward (huge swing in odds of scoring if you make it).

Walking in yesterday, he should’ve had it a must win game and it should’ve factored into every decision accordingly. You can’t coach that game not to lose.

If he was content playing for a tie yesterday because he believes we will win out... well, count me out. more than likely he’s just a product of decades of poor decision making across the nfl in that very scenario. Coaches are so programmed not to lose that they often forget to go win the game. Nor do you bet that you are more likely to win out than convert a 4 and 1.... and might I throw in that missing it doesn’t mean you lose this one either. also punting comes with risk of bad snap, missed handle, shanking, or putting in the endzone and suddenly you’ve pushed them back 20 yards instead of taking a shot at keeping the ball (an AWFUL trade)

The only metric that mattered was our odds of scoring. A tie is as good as a loss. That’s exactly the issue here- you have to play yesterday to win. Not losing isn’t good enough. If you think it was the right call to punt you are arguing, essentially, that punting made us more likely to score. If true I’m curious how far we have to get for that to tip. We weren’t kicking a fg at the 35, so do you still punt there, for instance? Anything across the 50 seems a no brainer to go for it to me.

So, for those that think the odds of being the next to score went up when we punted... where is the tipping point for you? The 35? Do you punt from closer than that?

Those are guys that tend to be very scheme specific and we swap schemes every three weeks the last decade. Makes sense few contribute here but some have elsewhere. Seymour is contributing in Carolina, won’t be shocked if Jon Williams does, Karlos for a stretch, NRC is making plays in LA. Cockrell in Pittsburgh

Ah- I’ve never actually seen a formal list of what’s included Hes defending proper medical and legal terminology use primarily You can get a quick diagnosis wrong without it being malpractice or illegal or even negligent. my impression was that someone in the booth watching the game could pull a guy not that the doctor was required to watch video before clearing. Odds are they cleared the test and then in reviewing the film pulled him back out. Just a guess. And like I mentioned, I’m not familiar with the formal protocol. If you have a link that’d be cool for discussions sake.

Obviously the lotto is longer odds. Which is why I used it to highlight how silly “it worked so it wasn’t lucky” sounded

Unless you are arguing that you were in favor of a move that made you less likely to win, you agree with me. Throw any window dressing on it you want—- but you thought the right choice to win was go for it.

All that matters today was winning. Slightly lessening your chance to win is the wrong choice when a loss or tie is catastrophic in your season.

If if I decide to dump my retirement fund into lotto tix it’s still incredibly lucky if I win. We’re talking odds not outcome.

Or he passed a quick sideline evaluation but the league caught what happened shortly after?

Tell us why you’re really upset, joe? What happened to you in LA?

City in the middle of major fires, and the teams been back and forth with the city. imagine if if the bulls moved to LA and then we got them back a decade later (and throw in the browns for good measure too) think wed immediately be filling the stadium?

That celebration with the whole stadium throwing snow was fantastic