Einstein

Agreed. The law of averages dictates that, no matter how good you are at it, you will fail eventually. And you can’t fail in that scenario, because failure means running clock. So put him in shotgun, and let him decide whether to throw or run it in. He is literally the best redzone QB of all time. He will get in one way or the other.

Belichick!? He is the one who started the fad of going for it on 4th down. He went for 4th and 2 from the deeeeeep in his own territory (against Indi) 15+ years ago when that was unheard of.

Because the Rams executed at a level that is near impossible to duplicate. They played at peak performance for 58 minutes. That’s not normal. To expect the Lions to do the same is … hard.

Yeah I think I didnt give this enough credit during the game. Stafford and Puka both played their absolute A game. If we played them 10 times, I think we beat them 9 of those... but 1 of those 10 happened Sunday.

It wasnt even 1 yard. The play-by-play online makrs it as 1 yard, but he was actually knocked out of bounds at the LOS. It would have been 4th and 7.

No offense intended but your confused. Stafford scrambled for 0 yards on that run. He literally got nocked out of bounds at the LOS. He was no where near a first down. It would have been 4th and 7.

You mean like the previous drive where we stopped them and they had to punt? You mean like two drives before that when we stuffed their final jet sweep attempt and then they never tried it again? And this is the disconnect between us. You feel that if the end result may have been the same, it doesn't matter. But thats not true. You always want to give your team the BEST CHANCE POSSIBLE - even if the result may be the same. We stopped them on 9% of their third downs. An onside kick has a 3% probability. Kicking off and keeping the TO gives us a 3x better chance. It's still a low chance, but its a BETTER chance. And thats the point you keep ignoring.

I actually think the Rams game is going to be the tougher game of the two.

I believe they would have opted for safe plays. Short safe throws, runs, etc. They were in almost the same exact situation about a month ago. Up by one score, got the ball with 2 minutes (and change) left and needed a score to put the game away. What did the Rams and McVay do? A few safe passes, short non-risky pass, then punted. This isn't guess work - its what they ACTUALLY DID. And they're not alone. Most teams do the same thing in that situation because they want to avoid any chance of a turnover that would destroy all odds of them winning.

you know we had stopped them on literally the drive right before that right? The drive they punted? literally, no one in this entire thread said they would run the ball three times and then punt. Not a single poster

You’re an oldmanfan - you should have seen thousands of examples of teams doing just that over the years. In fact, I can show you examples of McVay doing that if you’d like. But let’s pretend that he goes against all NFL conventional wisdom, and comes out and becomes aggressive, throwing the ball 3 times. First, that could lead to the Bills getting the ball back with tons of time AND three timeouts. Secondly, there is an increased chance of INT. Thirdly, it STILL gives us a higher percentage chance of winning. Why? We stopped them on 9% of third downs. That is 3x the rate of a successful onside. There’s no universe we are kicking and anti-kick is the better choice than kicking off and playing defense. with the kick, you have a 3% chance of converting. And only one shot of doing so. kicking off and you likely 3 chances at them throwing a bad ball, fumbling, dropping a pass, etc. Mathematically, kicking off is the right play.

A 3x increase in chance of converting is actually worth mentioning No, the game wasn’t over. Thousands of teams have won games in that same situation. One stop and you get the ball back. That’s the entire reason why coaches covet all 3 timeouts.

Which is exactly what we needed yesterday.

Then that’s idiotic of the coaching staff. You 100% kick it deep and play defense.z It would not have been a normal drive by the Rams. They would do what every team in that situation does - they would run the ball twice and then throw on 3rd and long. And because teams play those drives so conservatively, there is a decent chance we get a stop. I know they had converted all day, but anyone who has watched football for a long time know that those type of series often go to the defense because of how conservatively they’re called (to avoid a turnover) and the pressure. Even if it’s only an 8% chance we stop them, it’s a lot better than the 3% chance we convert the onside kick.

And we spent 1 of those 9 guys to punt return…. think about that we used 1 of our guys to RETURN a punt that everyone knew that the Rams would either kick out of bounds or into the endzone that little stuff drives me nuts your only chance is a blocked punt … put every freaking defender rushing the punter

It also felt like Martin took an unusually long time to get the ball off. But here’s the thing - Reid made a mistake on 1 play. McD and Babich refused to change defensive scheme for 3.5 quarters. That’s what drove me nuts. They were getting carved up for 3.5 quarters and they just stayed the course. So it’s 1 mistake by Reid vs repeated mistakes by McD/Babich. .

McD is so up and down with those sort of things. Last year he went for 4th and 1 at around the 30 yard line in a 1 score game. This year, he punts from 10 yards further.

There has never been a luckier team in NFL history.

It’s absurd

I’m not sure, but between him and Hamlin we were playing with 9 guys some plays. Which ironically is the amount of guys we had on the field when we were trying to block that final punt.

Thanks for sharing. So he thought the defense would hold them to 10 or less yards. He’s more confident in the defense than I was.

Im not sure I want them back right now

He was unbelievable.