The biggest blunder of the game IMO

[Bob Jones]

Totally agree with the OP, but was not surprised that McClappy made the wrong choice….he does that often. 😉 And that was after punting in the first half from just about the same spot on the field! It was a cold night where Bass had already missed from 50+ yards.

 

In any case, the Giants were going to have to score a TD. Yes if the FG was made, they would have to have scored a TD + a 2pt conversion to tie the game. 
 

The smarter play was to kick the punt and pin them back close to the 10 and let the defense take care of Tyrod & the Giants. And as already mentioned, the Bills should have run on 3rd down and forced NY to use their last TO.

 

The Bills were unbelievably lucky in the end to have walked away with the W there. 

[BuffaloBaumer]

I still can't believe nobody has brought up not going for 2 pt conversion when it would have forced Giants to make the PAT if needed. There was no difference of going up 5 or 4 points after that last TD. THe whole thing made absolutely zero sense. 

[Simon]

8 minutes ago, BuffaloBaumer said:

I still can't believe nobody has brought up not going for 2 pt conversion when it would have forced Giants to make the PAT if needed. There was no difference of going up 5 or 4 points after that last TD. THe whole thing made absolutely zero sense. 

 

If they kick the PAT to go up 5, and the Giants score a TD to take the lead, the Bills can then still win with a FG.

 

I initially wanted him to go for two when they were at midfield and driving but when they ran so much clock off finishing the drive, taking the PAT was the right call with the clock down under 5:00 and the Giants very unlikely having enough time for two FG drives.

 

[MJS]

You can't win if you are McDermott. Trust the kicker or don't, go for it or don't, even when you win a hard fought game. Even when the defense you coordinate only allows 9 points.

 

Nothing he can do will appease the mindless mob that wants him gone.

[Simon]

2 minutes ago, MJS said:

You can't win if you are McDermott. Trust the kicker or don't, go for it or don't, even when you win a hard fought game. Even when the defense you coordinate only allows 9 points.

 

Nothing he can do will appease the mindless mob that wants him gone.

 

The only egregious mistake he really made last night was the 2nd TO in the 2nd half when the Giants were running late and sort of scrambling and he bailed them out with the clock stoppage to set his defense.

I thought his game management was pretty good the rest of the evening, as it usually is.

[Bob Jones]

9 minutes ago, MJS said:

You can't win if you are McDermott. Trust the kicker or don't, go for it or don't, even when you win a hard fought game. Even when the defense you coordinate only allows 9 points.

 

Nothing he can do will appease the mindless mob that wants him gone.

The Houston loss in 2019, the 13 second disaster in 2021, the total no show vs the Bengals last year….as has been said about a million times in this forum now, he’s just not the guy to get the Bills over the hump.

 

You seem to be intimating here that fans should be proud of the job that McD (and the Bills) did last night, which is totally astounding. They looked like crap and were as lucky as one can get to walk away with a W.

[Bookie Man]

2 hours ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:

A bit of an oversimplification…what are the odds you can’t complete that throw to the TE and miss that fg.  Also you’ve gotta still punt the ball out at the 10 lol if it was a touchback it was only like 16 yards of field position change for a chance to end the game.

 

They just missed back to back pretty high percentage plays to win the game and now everybody is playing the hindsight game 

 

5% chance is a weird number to assign even if the punt was guaranteed to be as good as you’re saying they had to go an extra 25 yards in 4 down territory where a td wins it vs  giving up two very high percentage chances of ending the game 

Sometimes simple is good. It's about 50/50 that Bass makes that fg. Not really high %. If he misses that Giants get the ball at the 43 yard line, not the 36. So even if they punt for a touchback, it's 23 yards of field position at the very least, not 16. So Tyrod led offense driving 85+ yards for a TD with 90 seconds with no timeouts, I'd have to give that about a 5-8% chance of happening. But only having to go 57 yards with a timeout? I would give that about a 25-30% of happening. Big increase. I feel like analytics would heavily favor running the ball, make the gmen use up their timeouts and go almost the length of the field. jmho. 

[Rocbillsfan1]

25 minutes ago, MJS said:

You can't win if you are McDermott. Trust the kicker or don't, go for it or don't, even when you win a hard fought game. Even when the defense you coordinate only allows 9 points.

 

Nothing he can do will appease the mindless mob that wants him gone.

I get they aren’t firing him. Not asking for that. But it’s clear that we cannot really trust McDermott to make big decisions in big games. Doesn’t bode well for Confidence moving forward.

[Hebert19]

11 hours ago, ChronicAndKnuckles said:

The decision to kick a 53 FG when already up 4+ points knowing your kicker has been shaky and shanked another 53 yarder earlier in the game.

Missing the kick would put the Giants in good field position w/ a time out to work with and ample time to dink & dunk their way down to the red zone.

 

If McDermott would’ve punted, it would’ve placed the Giants around the 10 (who haven’t scored a TD in multiple games) and made them drive 90 yards! This decision would’ve eliminated all those Trent Edwards check downs and forced Tyrod to make multiple big plays. I’m sure the analytics would back this up all day. 
 

I know it’s irrelevant now, but the Bills are darn lucky to have escaped this game w/ a win. 

I punt there all day every day.  No way giants can go length of field.  

 

Run the ball again.  Make them use a time out then punt. Only way to play that.  Love the guts on both calls but they were dumb. 

54 minutes ago, MJS said:

You can't win if you are McDermott. Trust the kicker or don't, go for it or don't, even when you win a hard fought game. Even when the defense you coordinate only allows 9 points.

 

Nothing he can do will appease the mindless mob that wants him gone.

Would have been an easier call if they had to use their time out.   If you run the ball on 3rd and they burn timeout then I'm for field goal.  But by doing both throw and FG they literally handed them the game.  Good field possession and a time out to boot.  Pin them inside the 10 with no timeouts and there is no stress at all 

[CodeMonkey]

The biggest blunder of the game was Tyrods brain fart on the last play of the first half.

[billykay]

11 hours ago, Alpo Chino said:

Yes it was extremely questionable. About a 5% chance Giants drive 90 yards with 1:30.

and no timeouts.

[billykay]

6 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

The field likely was a little slick by that point, too.  (There was a mist that might both have been perceptible on TV.). I would have punted, too.  

I've seen teams in that position run it and actually get a first down. Not the probable outcome but you never know.

[DrDawkinstein]

Tyrod had the best play for the Bills all game when he checked to that run before the half. Totally changed the game, and was probably the biggest reason the Giants lost.

[RiotAct]

1 hour ago, Bob Jones said:

The Houston loss in 2019, the 13 second disaster in 2021, the total no show vs the Bengals last year….as has been said about a million times in this forum now, he’s just not the guy to get the Bills over the hump.

 

You seem to be intimating here that fans should be proud of the job that McD (and the Bills) did last night, which is totally astounding. They looked like crap and were as lucky as one can get to walk away with a W.

I don’t really put the Houston playoff loss on McD.   Lots of poor execution and “sugar-high Josh” in the 2nd half and overtime of that game.

[Steve O]

1 hour ago, BuffaloBaumer said:

I still can't believe nobody has brought up not going for 2 pt conversion when it would have forced Giants to make the PAT if needed. There was no difference of going up 5 or 4 points after that last TD. THe whole thing made absolutely zero sense. 

I was thinking the same thing and was about to make a new thread on it. It made absolutely zero sense to kick the extra point. At least with a six point lead the giants would have to kick the extra point in less than ideal conditions. No difference between a 4 or 5 point lead with 3:48 remaining. It would be questionable with 8 minutes left, not with under 4. 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

I dont fault that one on McD. You can defend or critique either way. At some point the players have to play. Bass is good. He should not be 50% on FG attempts even from 50+. He missed right on the first one and didn't correct. He had plenty of distance. 

Just as Knox needs to make that catch Bass needs to make that kick.

For the record, I said in the moment to punt it but I was ok with the FG attempt too.

[Low Positive]

2 minutes ago, RiotAct said:

I don’t really put the Houston playoff loss on McD.   Lots of poor execution and “sugar-high Josh” in the 2nd half and overtime of that game.

Remember this?

 

[DasNootz]

1 hour ago, BuffaloBaumer said:

I still can't believe nobody has brought up not going for 2 pt conversion when it would have forced Giants to make the PAT if needed. There was no difference of going up 5 or 4 points after that last TD. THe whole thing made absolutely zero sense. 

100% - No mention of that anywhere.  It may only be a small +expected value, but the right play certainly was going for 2 there.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

1 hour ago, BuffaloBaumer said:

I still can't believe nobody has brought up not going for 2 pt conversion when it would have forced Giants to make the PAT if needed. There was no difference of going up 5 or 4 points after that last TD. THe whole thing made absolutely zero sense. 

I said in the moment they should have gone for two. There was enough time and Giants had enough TOs they could have had two drives (they did) and could have kicked two FGs to win. 6 pt lead means two FGs is a tie. 

In the end I really don't know that there is a right or wrong decision there.

[RiotAct]

1 minute ago, FrenchConnection said:

Remember this?

 

yes - and I remember subsequently waking up my kids with all the screaming at my TV!

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, BuffaloBaumer said:

I still can't believe nobody has brought up not going for 2 pt conversion when it would have forced Giants to make the PAT if needed. There was no difference of going up 5 or 4 points after that last TD. THe whole thing made absolutely zero sense. 

 

I think the calculus on our side considered the additional point together with the field goal that we later missed. 

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

12 hours ago, ChronicAndKnuckles said:

The decision to kick a 53 FG when already up 4+ points knowing your kicker has been shaky and shanked another 53 yarder earlier in the game.

Missing the kick would put the Giants in good field position w/ a time out to work with and ample time to dink & dunk their way down to the red zone.

 

If McDermott would’ve punted, it would’ve placed the Giants around the 10 (who haven’t scored a TD in multiple games) and made them drive 90 yards! This decision would’ve eliminated all those Trent Edwards check downs and forced Tyrod to make multiple big plays. I’m sure the analytics would back this up all day. 
 

I know it’s irrelevant now, but the Bills are darn lucky to have escaped this game w/ a win. 

 

 

It was 53 not 63.  He was 11/16 from 50 before this game, and 3/3 this season.  

 

8 points and a kickoff to them means you cannot lose the game on the next possession.  You get to try and stop them from getting in the end zone, and you get to stop them on the conversion.  Either way you win.  

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

1 hour ago, MJS said:

You can't win if you are McDermott. Trust the kicker or don't, go for it or don't, even when you win a hard fought game. Even when the defense you coordinate only allows 9 points.

 

Nothing he can do will appease the mindless mob that wants him gone.

 

People are upset that we didn't punt from the 36 yard line.  Why do you get your kicker a contract extension if he can't make a 53 yard FG?  Or that we didn't run on 3rd and 9.  We have one of the best QBs in the league and we shouldn't run a play action pass on 3rd and 9?  

 

These are the decisions that Doug Marrone would make.  

[ChronicAndKnuckles]

19 minutes ago, Bleeding Bills Blue said:

 

People are upset that we didn't punt from the 36 yard line.  Why do you get your kicker a contract extension if he can't make a 53 yard FG?  Or that we didn't run on 3rd and 9.  We have one of the best QBs in the league and we shouldn't run a play action pass on 3rd and 9?  

 

These are the decisions that Doug Marrone would make.  

Because he just missed the previous 53 yarder. McDermott should’ve ran the ball, forced the Giants to use their last TO, and let Tyrod Taylor engineer a 90 yard game winning TD drive against a top defense. Good luck ! 

1 hour ago, Hebert19 said:

I punt there all day every day.  No way giants can go length of field.  

 

Run the ball again.  Make them use a time out then punt. Only way to play that.  Love the guts on both calls but they were dumb. 

Would have been an easier call if they had to use their time out.   If you run the ball on 3rd and they burn timeout then I'm for field goal.  But by doing both throw and FG they literally handed them the game.  Good field possession and a time out to boot.  Pin them inside the 10 with no timeouts and there is no stress at all 

I really don’t know why this is so hard to comprehend for some people here. 

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

7 minutes ago, ChronicAndKnuckles said:

Because he just missed the previous 53 yarder. McDermott should’ve ran the ball, forced the Giants to use their last TO, and let Tyrod Taylor engineer a 90 yard game winning TD drive against a top defense. Good luck ! 

I really don’t know why this is so hard to comprehend for some people here. 

 

Since when does missing a FG mean you can't make another though?  

 

Also our best player is the QB - i probably trust him to win it (he almost did). 

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

6 hours ago, Alpo Chino said:

Sometimes simple is good. It's about 50/50 that Bass makes that fg. Not really high %. If he misses that Giants get the ball at the 43 yard line, not the 36. So even if they punt for a touchback, it's 23 yards of field position at the very least, not 16. So Tyrod led offense driving 85+ yards for a TD with 90 seconds with no timeouts, I'd have to give that about a 5-8% chance of happening. But only having to go 57 yards with a timeout? I would give that about a 25-30% of happening. Big increase. I feel like analytics would heavily favor running the ball, make the gmen use up their timeouts and go almost the length of the field. jmho. 

I def flubbed the yard lines for sure haha but I think the advanced metrics probably said go for it which is why we did it. Even if that pass to Knox and fg are both 50/50 it’s a 75% chance of hitting on one of those things 

 

then you gotta factor in the odds you actually pin them deep rather than a touchback…it was probably pretty close either way 

[JohnNord]

17 hours ago, Simon said:

 

I said on 2nd down that I hoped he'd trust his defense and let Bass try it to go up 8.

I stand by that and think it was the right call.

This was the right call because on 4th and 10 from the 35 you really have no other choice.  
 

This decision was always going to based on the end-result.   Bass misses the kick and people say “why would you not punt the ball?”
 

Had they punted the ball and the Giants scored the GW TD the narrative then becomes “How can you not trust your kicker who missed 1 FG all season long”

[ChronicAndKnuckles]

34 minutes ago, JohnNord said:

This was the right call because on 4th and 10 from the 35 you really have no other choice.  
 

This decision was always going to based on the end-result.   Bass misses the kick and people say “why would you not punt the ball?”
 

Had they punted the ball and the Giants scored the GW TD the narrative then becomes “How can you not trust your kicker who missed 1 FG all season long”

I texted my brother before they even made the decision that they better punt the ball. This is one of the few moments where being conservative is a good thing. The Giants haven’t scored an offensive TD in 3 games and that was WITH their starting QB healthy. All of the sudden they were gonna drive 70-80 yards for the GW TD w/ a backup QB and decimated O-line ? Against the best pass rushing team in the league? Trust your defense that you’ve dumped multiple resources into and let Oliver/Rousseau/Floyd do their thing. 

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

19 hours ago, ToGoGo said:

You trust your great kicker. 

 

I've learned the opposite actually. 

 

In hindsight you run the ball three times and punt and the Giants likely never cross midfield. But that is hindsight. 

19 hours ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:

I don’t think I’ve ever seen two 50/50 pis called in a row leading to untimed downs in my life and I don’t think mahomes gets both those calls either 

 

I think that’s just as controversial if not more so than what actually ended up happening 

 

I recall it happening probably 5-6 years ago. Think it was a prime-time game but can't recall the game. But yes, it is very rare. Yesterday was certainly a game it could have happened and I'm not sure folks would be irate if it did. 

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

28 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

I've learned the opposite actually. 

 

In hindsight you run the ball three times and punt and the Giants likely never cross midfield. But that is hindsight. 

 

I recall it happening probably 5-6 years ago. Think it was a prime-time game but can't recall the game. But yes, it is very rare. Yesterday was certainly a game it could have happened and I'm not sure folks would be irate if it did. 

The pi they actually called was way too ticky tacky to call a second in a row at the end of a game unless someone got straight up tackled with the ball in the air.  I don’t have a problem with people complaining the second one was missed but the first one never should’ve been called imo…not the way that game was officiated.  I was seeing a lot of grabbed jerseys 

Edited October 17, 2023 by Generic_Bills_Fan

[DabillsDaBillsDaBills]

38 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

I've learned the opposite actually. 

 

In hindsight you run the ball three times and punt and the Giants likely never cross midfield. But that is hindsight. 

 

I recall it happening probably 5-6 years ago. Think it was a prime-time game but can't recall the game. But yes, it is very rare. Yesterday was certainly a game it could have happened and I'm not sure folks would be irate if it did. 

 

What's that based on? Our DEF was giving up chunks of yards the entire 2nd half. 

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

13 minutes ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:

The pi they actually called was way too ticky tacky to call a second in a row at the end of a game unless someone got straight up tackled with the ball in the air.  I don’t have a problem with people complaining the second one was missed but the first one never should’ve been called imo…not the way that game was officiated.  I was seeing a lot of grabbed jerseys 

maybe i need to rewatch. I thought the first was far more blatant with multiple grabs, a hook and never playing the ball. 
 

thought it was an easier call than the second. 

[pennstate10]

20 hours ago, ChronicAndKnuckles said:

The decision to kick a 53 FG when already up 4+ points knowing your kicker has been shaky and shanked another 53 yarder earlier in the game.

Missing the kick would put the Giants in good field position w/ a time out to work with and ample time to dink & dunk their way down to the red zone.

 

If McDermott would’ve punted, it would’ve placed the Giants around the 10 (who haven’t scored a TD in multiple games) and made them drive 90 yards! This decision would’ve eliminated all those Trent Edwards check downs and forced Tyrod to make multiple big plays. I’m sure the analytics would back this up all day. 
 

I know it’s irrelevant now, but the Bills are darn lucky to have escaped this game w/ a win. 

 

 

Uh....

Call me crazy, but I thinking running the ball at the opponents 1 yd line with 14 sec and no TO left qualifies as a pretty big blunder.

[Bookie Man]

5 hours ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:

I def flubbed the yard lines for sure haha but I think the advanced metrics probably said go for it which is why we did it. Even if that pass to Knox and fg are both 50/50 it’s a 75% chance of hitting on one of those things 

 

then you gotta factor in the odds you actually pin them deep rather than a touchback…it was probably pretty close either way 

You can't go into a 2 play scenario thinking it's 75% that one of these will work.  For example.. your odds of picking up a yard if you run 2 QB sneaks in a row is probably like 90%. But say.. you're deep in your own territory and you don't get it on the first try, it doesn't mean you should go for it again because it's 90% that it should work this time. You need to adjust to in-game scenarios... A 53 yard field goal is still 50/50 and if you miss, you give them a HUGE advantage at winning.. From roughly about 5% to 25% chance at winning.  A 5X probability increase. THAT'S FREAKIN HUGE! There's no way analytics would favor a FG right there. This is all just my napkin math, but how much better would you have felt with Tyrod having to go 90 yards in 90 seconds as opposed to 57 yards with a timeout? I was so uneasy with them starting at midfield. But I wouldn't have had a worry in the world if they started from their own 10. 

Edited October 17, 2023 by Alpo Chino

[HappyDays]

17 hours ago, gobills1212 said:

You either want your team to be aggressive or you dont.

 

Why is aggressive inherently good? What ever happened to context? We're facing the worst offense in football. They've scored 1 offensive TD in the previous 11 quarters of game time. They have a backup QB, a gimpy RB, and missing several OL including their stud LT. We can pin them back inside the 20 with zero timeouts and 1 minute to drive for a TD, or we can risk giving them the ball at midfield with 1 timeout. Why in that scenario is aggressive the right mindset?

 

Edited October 17, 2023 by HappyDays

[Old Coot]

23 hours ago, ToGoGo said:

You trust your great kicker.

This and presumably you rely on how Bass was doing in pre-game practice kicks.

[HappyDays]

14 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

“Are coaches not willing to go against the slight statistical benefit that WPA (win probability added) provides?”

 

I hate these newfangled "win probability" calculators. I'm not inherently anti-analytics by any means, but I feel like this tool is fundamentally flawed in a way that no one talks about. The issue is that it doesn't account for a wild swing in momentum depending on the outcome of the play. Like in that example with the Eagles, throwing it on 3rd and 9 has a lot of potentially negative outcomes that wildly swing the win probability in the Jets direction. There is one outstanding outcome that guarantees a win, but also several negative outcomes that make your chances much worse. Whereas playing it safe with a run and then punting, you know with 99% certainty you are just mildly shifting win probability towards the Jets. There isn't much variance in that decision. The win probability calculator can't truly know how likely any given outcome is if you play aggressive or play conservative, so it is just guessing on certain variables and pops out a number that a ton of analytics people treat like gospel. But it isn't, there is still a ton of context that the calculator can't possibly capture. So personally I will almost always take the lower variance option (which is usually the conservative option) unless I am facing an offense or a QB that I expect to move the ball on my defense.

 

I don't know if I explained that too well, but it's bothered me ever since I first saw these win probability calculators pop out of the blue several years ago and everybody immediately bought into them without any hint of skepticism.

 

Our decision at the end of the Giants game is a good example of why I feel this way. We ran the only possible series of plays (pass followed by a FG attempt) that would have given the Giants a decent chance at a win. McDermott would rightfully be getting blasted today if the coin flip ending had gone in the other direction. Honestly he SHOULD be getting blasted but the media forgets those mistakes in a win.

 

Edited October 17, 2023 by HappyDays

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

11 hours ago, Alpo Chino said:

You can't go into a 2 play scenario thinking it's 75% that one of these will work.  For example.. your odds of picking up a yard if you run 2 QB sneaks in a row is probably like 90%. But say.. you're deep in your own territory and you don't get it on the first try, it doesn't mean you should go for it again because it's 90% that it should work this time. You need to adjust to in-game scenarios... A 53 yard field goal is still 50/50 and if you miss, you give them a HUGE advantage at winning.. From roughly about 5% to 25% chance at winning.  A 5X probability increase. THAT'S FREAKIN HUGE! There's no way analytics would favor a FG right there. This is all just my napkin math, but how much better would you have felt with Tyrod having to go 90 yards in 90 seconds as opposed to 57 yards with a timeout? I was so uneasy with them starting at midfield. But I wouldn't have had a worry in the world if they started from their own 10. 

This is gonna be a big time agree to disagree I think 😂 obviously I’m not an nfl coach so you absolutely could be right but I’d imagine coaches plan for two play scenarios all the time…like a running play on third and medium because they have a passing play they like for fourth and short if they don’t pick it up.  I think they absolutely crunch numbers on two play scenarios and likely had the thought that the fg is 50/50 when they called that play to Knox so factoring in the probability of both plays is exactly what they’re doing.  If they didn’t have a passing play they liked on third down or didn’t like the odds of the fg they more than likely would’ve ran it and punted so the Knox catch probability is directly related to the fg probability. Again all speculation though because I am some dummy that watches the game from my couch lol 

 

I think they probably had a third and long passing play in mind before they even got the ball because that was the scenario they were most likely to end up in.  
 

I have trouble hating on the call because he was wide freakin open haha to each their own but when we’re evaluating the decision making of the coaches at the time I feel like I’d give a little bit more weight to the play design worked perfectly than the actual result.  That’s certainly a personal taste thing though. If josh threw up a 50/50 ball to knox because nobody got any separation I’d be with the run and punt crew.

 

 I do get your point that they’re kind of separate events because you can technically punt after the throw to Knox but I think when the numbers get crunched they look several plays ahead.  It was probably the odds of it being impossible to lose in regulation vs punting and playing defense when the Knox call was made and it’s personal taste whether that’s the right way to look at it.  If the throw to Knox goes incomplete the giants have time and a timeout so the odds shift a good amount.    

Edited October 17, 2023 by Generic_Bills_Fan

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

11 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

I hate these newfangled "win probability" calculators. I'm not inherently anti-analytics by any means, but I feel like this tool is fundamentally flawed in a way that no one talks about. The issue is that it doesn't account for a wild swing in momentum depending on the outcome of the play. Like in that example with the Eagles, throwing it on 3rd and 9 has a lot of potentially negative outcomes that wildly swing the win probability in the Jets direction. There is one outstanding outcome that guarantees a win, but also several negative outcomes that make your chances much worse. Whereas playing it safe with a run and then punting, you know with 99% certainty you are just mildly shifting win probability towards the Jets. There isn't much variance in that decision. The win probability calculator can't truly know how likely any given outcome is if you play aggressive or play conservative, so it is just guessing on certain variables and pops out a number that a ton of analytics people treat like gospel. But it isn't, there is still a ton of context that the calculator can't possibly capture. So personally I will almost always take the lower variance option (which is usually the conservative option) unless I am facing an offense or a QB that I expect to move the ball on my defense.

 

I don't know if I explained that too well, but it's bothered me ever since I first saw these win probability calculators pop out of the blue several years ago and everybody immediately bought into them without any hint of skepticism.

 

Our decision at the end of the Giants game is a good example of why I feel this way. We ran the only possible series of plays (pass followed by a FG attempt) that would have given the Giants a decent chance at a win. McDermott would rightfully be getting blasted today if the coin flip ending had gone in the other direction. Honestly he SHOULD be getting blasted but the media forgets those mistakes in a win.

 

From talkin about this for awhile I think this is all a really interesting debate that can vary wildly based on how you assign probabilities to things.  It’s true without a doubt that it would be questioned more if they lost.  
 

For me personally the coaches had a strong feeling that the throw to knox was a high percentage play based on what the giants defense had been doing to defend the run up to that point and it’s game over right there.

 

it’s hard for me to personally say that part of it was a bad decision because it worked like an absolute charm…I think they hit that play probably 9 out of 10 times and much like they’re getting criticized now for it not working they’d look smart if it did. Can absolutely see the other side of it though

As far as where the coaches were coming from I think they saw the odds of that play succeeding as much higher than a coin flip.  Whether they should’ve or not is certainly up for debate lol 

Edited October 17, 2023 by Generic_Bills_Fan

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

11 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

Why is aggressive inherently good? What ever happened to context? We're facing the worst offense in football. They've scored 1 offensive TD in the previous 11 quarters of game time. They have a backup QB, a gimpy RB, and missing several OL including their stud LT. We can pin them back inside the 20 with zero timeouts and 1 minute to drive for a TD, or we can risk giving them the ball at midfield with 1 timeout. Why in that scenario is aggressive the right mindset?

 

I do think the odds change a bit down the stretch where defenses start to get fatigued and they’re in four down territory…it’s not like they weren’t moving the ball all night.   My thought is if elam wasn’t on the field we probably run once and punt but with a pretty moderate liability out there on defense they didn’t feel as comfy as they otherwise would have. There’s always a decent chance of a deep pi call these days completely neutralizing the field position advantage.

 

your last sentence is what I really don’t understand but that could be a me thing I don’t think anyone is inherently wrong here lol the criticism side is factoring in the third and fourth down decisions as a lump single decision so why would the pro side not be allowed to factor in the odds of the Knox pass OR the fg succeeding. Those odds of winning the game were likely just as high or higher than the run on third down and punt.  It wouldn’t have made sense to throw and then punt so the decision to kick the fg was more than likely made when that throw to Knox was called 

 

the alternative is to weigh the 3rd down play and 4th down play success rate separately…the criticism side doesn’t get to have it both ways imo.  
 

I explained my point way better here than my previous rambling nonsense post so hopefully nobody reads the old one 😂. 

Edited October 17, 2023 by Generic_Bills_Fan