|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,068
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,068 |
This is the beauty of Arians.
It feels like Kitchens isn't ready to be a HC. Plus, I don't want a never before HC calling plays. Too much on their plate all at once IMO. But Arians coming in for 3, maybe 4 yers max allows FK to grow as the heir apparent.
We can keep the system together for decades.
The difference between Jesus and religion
Religion mocks you for having dirty feet
Jesus gets down on his knees and washes them
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,557
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,557 |
This is something to strongly consider and there is a lot of talk in Arizona about kitchens working with Rosen.
I would have no problem with Kitchens HC n Williams assistant HC in charge of defense. Make his son DC. Give Williams a bump in pay, new title and let he and kitchens work together. Might be best long term setup.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
When I use the term Heir apparent I'm Assuming that Dorsey has told and promised this to Kitchens making him Asst. Head Coach along with his OC title.
He is cut out of the same cloth as Arians and after building a playoff team and having Baker as his QB he possibly would want the Future HC position with the Browns. He wins a SB in 2020 then I can expect him able to write his own ticket to any opening around. By then I'd hope we groomed our next play caller within the system. Brian Braswell or Bob Saunders 
jdreaming about it...lol 
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Dude we won and i called it MORONIC ... it worked and i said it was DUMB ... if thats the case i clearly didn’t consider the outcome at all when evaluating the situation ... my stance is ... It was a great outcome resulting form a bad decision .... that was my conclusion ... So why would u think if we lost My conclusion would be..... it was a bad outcome resulting from a bad idea ... Naaa ... i’m Just a MORON ... i’m not a HYPOCRITICAL MORON like some .... *L* .... Sorry ... to me the KEY piece of ANALYTICS would be the first # Haus used right out of the gate ... 60% SUCCESS RATE on 4th and 1 .... i could care less what comes after that .... RIGHT THERE as a HC it just became a NO-BRAINER .... when u consider that - it was a 38 yard FG attempt in perfect weather conditions ... - they had scored 1 TD and 3 FG’s when they were under no time constraints ... - Case Keenum and a bunch of rookie recievers were on the other bench .. not Brees/Thomas or Rodgers/Adams ... - it forces them to score a TD instead of a FG ... thats at least a 35 YARD DIFFERENCE in line to make .... considering who was on the other bench ... - 1:48 with no TO’s left .... - and last but not least ... IT WAS A FULL YARD .... Haus’s 60% stat includes from 4th and a pubic hair to 4th and a full yard .... 4th and 2 inches is included in 4th and 1 for statistical purposes ... U guys may not consider that ... but old relics like me actually THINK ITS IMPORTANT from experience ... *L* ... Your barking up the wrong tree dude ... Just curious ... u ever heard of the word HYPERBOLE? .... ... First of all, that 60% figure is probably low balling it to begin with. There were a number of figures I used that were very conservative, to give a sort of leeway in the decision. Even 4th and 2 is like 60% to convert when not goal to go, 50% when goal to go. (At about the 10 yard line with the game on the line complicates this further.) There were other areas I was generous to the kicking side as well. I figured a 97% chance of a successful field goal for the Browns. As someone else pointed out, this is clearly too high. The kick is not automatic, not even a 27* yarder in good conditions. I also didn't factor in the yardage lost on a missed FG (compared to a failed 4th down conversion), because it was a rough model used to convey the idea. Most of these 'rounding errors' made the "kick FG" option better than it actually was, but still weren't enough to make that the better decision. About the 60% figure: it's hard to get the exact number for the exact situation. It is true that in some (not all) of the data, 4th and inches is treated the same as 4th and a full yard. However, the starting figure is really more like 63% (another rounding error to give me some leeway). When you remove desperation plays-- where time is a factor and the offense might have to go for an aggressive, downfield pass even on 4th and short, it increases further. Call it 2:1 in favor of converting, or ~66.7%. This can be adjusted down somewhat given that it was about a full yard (but not 1.49999 yards, which is also included in the 4th and 1 data). Then you factor in the actual personnel. Granted, a run up the middle to the RB isn't the most surprising play there, but you try to stop Nick Chubb, a powerful runner with the most yards per carry after contact in the league, for less than a yard with 2 tight ends and a fullback in front of him. One of their players got off a block quickly and made a great play behind the line of scrimmage. It happens. You don't want to pass too often in those situations, but the occasional pass is a good idea in that they are often successful in their own right, and they keep the defense somewhat honest. Quick reading list: http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/index.php/home/research/game-strategy/120-4th-down-studyhttp://blog.minitab.com/blog/the-statist...ing-on-4th-downhttp://www.sportsonearth.com/article/62665328I know, I know. You know football and you don't need these stinkin' stats to tell you differently than what you already know.
Last edited by Haus; 12/20/18 12:51 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
Point blank...starting on your 25 rather than 8 Needing to go 60 yards for a 49 yd FG to win. Or needing to go 76 yards for a TD to win the game. The odds for the FG scenario was the better option analytically. Plus the extra 16 yards needed to get with Time running down were much better odds as well.
So it was a mistake. Actually he should have let Baker try to draw them offsides and at the last second call the time out...if that was the intent then we actually would have been successful as Baker did draw I think Chubb offsides as Robinson reached over and touched him but Williams called the TO too soon as their intention was not for that Offsides.
So using stats and analyzing it. He made a mistake. pure and simple. It happened to work out as our Defense stopped them but that would have been the same result with them needing a drive for the TD after we kicked a FG...remember Joseph almost always kicks them with no return. Mile High the ball would travel even longer so 99% sure there would not have been any return.
Again a mistake no denying that. Doesn't make Williams Stupid or not worthy to be a HC. The thing that really mattered was he was willing to rely on the Defense which was the right move.
Note there was also a slight possibility of a blocked FG and with that a Return on the recovery of the block that could have ended the game against us as well. So that was eliminated by the 4th down attempt.
jmho
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
I disagree. I think it was a great decision and the failed 4th down conversion is clouding people's judgement. If the offense had converted, there would be a lot more people 'for' the decision, even if the result of the game remained the same.
I don't think kicking is the analytics play, but if you say it is, please provide some actual analytics. I think kicking is more of the old-school football play based on intuition and because it feels right. It's risk-averse nature kicking in. Most coaches would certainly kick there.
Of course having to go 75 yards for a touchdown is harder than going 60 yards for a 47 yard field goal. What you neglected to mention is, most of the time the Broncos never would have even had a chance for the latter because the Browns would usually pick up the conversion and then kneel a couple times for the win.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
Thought I gave the analytics???
Going 76/75 yards for a TD with NO timeouts left.
vs.
Going 60 yards for a legit FG attempt and I was being kind in Denver 59 yarder is possibility which meant that attempt would be needing 50 yards. My math was incorrect, that 60 yards as you said was for a 49 yarder. Still in Denver 59 yards is a legitimate shot.
But analytics I guess is the pct. of success and failure.
I just thought it was logical that 75 yards in a time constraint would ALWAYS be more desirable than a team going 50-60 yards in that same time constrain to win a game.
Do you need more analytics...
Yes the game was over if achieved - I thought we made the wrong call, Play action pass would have been the play. We were doing a QB sneak when Williams rushed to call the TO, for what, a run up the middle instead?
And I don't fault Williams at all but just on a coaching stand point it was the wrong move. Not a vitally wrong move as our D was able to stop them.
I am not chastising Williams, I think he's an excellent coach just nobody is Perfect the odds in winning I think was in our favor to kick the FG.
jmho
For the record in this situation (4th and 1) for that matter 3rd n 1, also for me Two point plays.
I'd like to see that Triple RB formation with Chubb in back of Mayfield and a yard up closer on either side of Chubb Duke and Hilliard with Mayfield under Center.
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
The main issue I have with that is that it doesn't even consider what happens the majority of the time-- effectively an outright win for the Browns. This only happens if the Browns go for it.
There are a tremendous amount of other "what if's" that strengthen the 'go for it' strategy as well, though none even close to as meaningful as the above. They include the Browns missing the FG or having it blocked, penalties, lengthy kickoff return (kick out of the back of the endzone was likely, but not certain), missed FG for the Broncos on the other end, and so forth.
I already know that it's easier to drive 50-60 yards for a FG attempt than it is to drive 75 yards for a touchdown. It's everything else that still has to be accounted for..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,384
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,384 |
j/c
I would have kicked the FG...but I'm not all fired up about going for it. There are excellent arguments on both sides of the debate. I don't think there was a "wrong" decision there and in this case. JMO
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
ok...I got more the instinct stuff not analytic...lol but if we were a playoff team and this loss would give away home field advantage I think we would have taken the odds and let our D stop them from going 75 yards. That is all I'm saying. That was the right direction for a coach. It was in a situation where the difference was actually minimal for the risk and reward. So again I don't think Williams should be chastised for the decision. If asked, I think most would have said that it was the wrong decision.
We won so he cannot be wrong. Sometimes its as simple as that.
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
The only way I'd rather the Browns kick in that position is if we were one of the worst teams in the league and perhaps needed a quarterback. The idea would be to 'stealthily' play for draft position.
The higher the stakes, the more I'd want the Browns to go for it, because any way I can think about the situation, the end result I come away with is that it gave the Browns a higher probability to win the game than kicking the FG would have.
That's actually one of the keys to these 4th downs that even some of the analytics nerds don't account for. You don't have to go to full blown, optimal strategy all the time.
You can pick and choose the situations that give the biggest boost to win probability (perhaps in the most crucial situations), without moving the needle so much that other teams start taking those too (relegating your own team to much thinner, and ever more controversial edges.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
As a coach personally I probably would have gone for it. But no way I run up the middle...lol Possibly with a spread formation.
But as mentioned I would have gone play action with Baker.
Just when I say most would have kicked the FG I'm talking NFL coaches...and I'm guessing of course I have no LINKS...lol
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Personnel wise, you have a good point. I don't mind the play call in a generic situation, but the situation was anything but generic. The Broncos were down to what-- one healthy corner?
I wouldn't have had an issue with coming out in 11 personnel. Spread the defense out, see what kind of look you get. You could still run it a decent amount of the time, but it's obviously not as predictable as the power I formation we came out in.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Even that seems a little ticky tack. Call it limitation of small sample sizes... we only saw what happened on one play in that situation. It affects all of our judgement not only on the decision to go for it, but also the formation and play call.
As a general rule, it's hard to go wrong with a simple inside zone or similar in that situation. Predictable? Yes. Hard to stop with Nick Chubb back there? Yes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
j/c:
Goodness. This has become the Political forum.
Last edited by Versatile Dog; 12/20/18 02:02 PM. Reason: added the j/c
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
j/c:
Goodness. This has become the Political forum. It's actually a good discussion about a controversial 4th down decision. Hopefully people picked up some ideas on both sides. Granted, at some point, we might need a dedicated 4th down thread, because this is the coaching search thread and it really only relates to that as far as what you think about Gregg Williams (possible future head coach) and his game management style.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
On that last point: I hope that whoever the next head coach is-- Gregg Williams or someone else-- will continue to push the envelope in these situations.
Lean toward (and go beyond) what Bill Belichick, Sean Payton, Mike Smith, Rob Chudzinski, Doug Pederson, Gregg Williams, and others have done.
Avoid falling into the John Fox, Andy Reid, Mike McCarthy trap of somehow being more conservative than much of the league (even with excellent QB play), despite being otherwise decent to great coaches.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
On the offsides/timeout sequence, Gregg was running down the sidelines and
waving his arms, calling the timeout, directly in the field of view of the defender who jumped. I think it is possible that, rather than the timeout Preventing the penalty, the effort to call the timeout may have Caused the offsides.
On the decision - first I disagree with citing the averages, there is no average situation, ever. Many factors have been cited, don't know if our center with a bad ankle for 2 months has been mentioned.
Second, I want to amplify what Mourg touched on. This is a young team, still learning to win. This was a big stage, a primetime game on nationwide TV. Our coach told our team, "I believe in you. You can get this done." The O failed, but the D got it done. This is what learning to win looks like. There were MULTIPLE plays made during that stand, it was fourth and ten when Peppers ended it.
Situationally, there was little real risk, and the potential benefit, extending far beyond this game and season, was quite large.
If you want to be a team that expects to win, you have to act like it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
I'm actually kind of curious to do the "maths" on this. I'm going to completely over-simplify this, but lets get some rough percentages here.
Let's say on 4th downs, teams are 60% likely to convert. The Broncos also had 10 previous drives, and scored field goals on 3 and a touch down on one, so let's just (extremely) ballpark a 10% chance to drive and score a TD and a 30% chance to drive to score a FG.
Situation one, we go for it. Right off the bat, we have a 60% chance to win out-right. Of the 40% chance where we don't convert, we'll say the Bronco have roughly a 30% chance to drive to within FG range and convert. Yes, I get that 30% isn't exact as they would technically be trying to just get into FG range, but they can also miss, there were no timeouts left, etc. So that means, of the 40% chance we fail the 4th down, 30% of that means they would score and win, about 12% overall.
So that roughly breaks down to:
60% - We convert and win
28% - We prevent a FG and win.
12% - They kick a FG and we lose.
Scenario two, we attempt a FG. First, we'd have to look at Joseph's conversion rate. He's 87% on FGs overall but 100% on short distance FG. However, he's also 87% on PAT attempts. So let's just round up and say there's a 90% chance he hits it. Of that 10%, the Broncos would have the same 30% chance to drive down and score, so 3% overall. Of the remaining 90%, the Broncos had about a 10% chance of scoring a TD. Again, crazy-rough guesstimate, but for simplicity, let's just go with that. So, about a 9% chance of scoring a TD.
So that all breaks down to:
7% - Kicker misses, but the defense holds and we win.
81% - Kicker makes it, and the defense prevents a TD and we win.
9% - The kicker makes it, but the defense can't prevent a TD and we lose.
3% - The kicker misses, and the broncos get a field goal and we lose.
Oddly enough that works out to about a 12% chance of victory anyway, which was the same as going for it.
Not sure what that proves, if anything, but it sort of shows that either decision really isn't "right" or "wrong".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Now watch as BOTH sides say my percentages are way off 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,821
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,821 |
Yes. A nice discussion... It would appear that many are stuck in the "old school" ways. It's not a knock on an individual, but some may need to open up about some new modern ways of thinking... Here's a nice little article... and this is the stuff I love to read about. Oh, and hey, a Sashi sighting. I'm starting to realize that the "old school" peeps are the ones who disliked Sashi… because they either don't understand, or chose to ignore the direction the game is going. Like I said, I think Gettleman and the Giants are in trouble and I'm so so so glad we hired Dorsey, who seems to be a more forward thinker, over Gettleman. Link This link is also pertinent to the subject title. We would need to get a HC who is on the same page... whether it's GW or whomever, we are on the right track and it's nice to be mentioned at the forefront of the movement. Enjoy!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,657
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,657 |
J/C
If only we had a Gameday Forum to discuss plays from the game!
There may be people who have more talent than you, but there's no excuse for anyone to work harder than you do.
-Derek Jeter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 94
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 94 |
Thought I gave the analytics???
Going 76/75 yards for a TD with NO timeouts left.
vs.
Going 60 yards for a legit FG attempt and I was being kind in Denver 59 yarder is possibility which meant that attempt would be needing 50 yards. My math was incorrect, that 60 yards as you said was for a 49 yarder. Still in Denver 59 yards is a legitimate shot.
But analytics I guess is the pct. of success and failure.
I just thought it was logical that 75 yards in a time constraint would ALWAYS be more desirable than a team going 50-60 yards in that same time constrain to win a game.
Do you need more analytics...
Yes the game was over if achieved - I thought we made the wrong call, Play action pass would have been the play. We were doing a QB sneak when Williams rushed to call the TO, for what, a run up the middle instead?
And I don't fault Williams at all but just on a coaching stand point it was the wrong move. Not a vitally wrong move as our D was able to stop them.
I am not chastising Williams, I think he's an excellent coach just nobody is Perfect the odds in winning I think was in our favor to kick the FG.
jmho
For the record in this situation (4th and 1) for that matter 3rd n 1, also for me Two point plays.
I'd like to see that Triple RB formation with Chubb in back of Mayfield and a yard up closer on either side of Chubb Duke and Hilliard with Mayfield under Center.
They'd only have to have made 35 yds to attempt a field goal...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,821
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,821 |
Here's a good one if you don't want to read the link... Hornsby, like Sharp, said teams are finally figuring out the value of never giving the ball up. In baseball, analytics staffs had to work to convince managers that you shouldn’t give up outs via sacrifice bunts, since there are only 27 outs for each team in a game. In the NFL, this logic applies to punting. Teams this season average between 10 and 13 drives per game, and 11 teams have fourth-down conversion rates of at least 60 percent. Of the six teams with conversion rates of at least 70 percent, five are locks for the playoffs. The Chiefs have converted 90.9 percent of their fourth downs. The lesson: Do everything you can to keep the ball.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
 ... SITUATION NOT REQUIRED as usual .... NEVER EVER SACRIFICE and give up outs .... well ... you’ll have to forgive me ... if my 150 hitting SS is up with no outs and he’s my #9 hitter with a guy on 1st and/or 2nd ... I’M GIVING UP THAT OUT EVERY SINGLE DANG TIME .... Now if Mike Trout’s up ... ya ... prolly not .... The chiefs are over 90% on 4th downs ... that prolly has nuttin to do with Mahhomes/Hunt/Hill/Kelce being on there team ... NUTTIN AT ALL ....  ... SITUATIONS MEAN NUTTIN in your world ... they MEAN EVERYTHING in mine ....  ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
[quote=DiamDawg]
I know, I know. You know football and you don't need these stinkin' stats to tell you differently than what you already know. The SITUATION is the OVER RIDING FACTOR in my decisions .... if u want MATH to be your be all/end all ... we just disagree ... i’m Fine with that ...  U IGNORED ALL MY FACTS as to why i would not have gone for it in that SITUATION and boiled it down to a statistical argument .... I’m out dawgs ... were not gonna agree and no new info is gonna come out ... Enjoy dawgs ... I’m OUT ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,821
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,821 |
... SITUATION NOT REQUIRED as usual .... NEVER EVER SACRIFICE and give up outs .... well ... you’ll have to forgive me ... if my 150 hitting SS is up with no outs and he’s my #9 hitter with a guy on 1st and/or 2nd ... I’M GIVING UP THAT OUT EVERY SINGLE DANG TIME .... Now if Mike Trout’s up ... ya ... prolly not .... The chiefs are over 90% on 4th downs ... that prolly has nuttin to do with Mahhomes/Hunt/Hill/Kelce being on there team ... NUTTIN AT ALL .... ... SITUATIONS MEAN NUTTIN in your world ... they MEAN EVERYTHING in mine .... ... Disagree. The situation means something. I even stated as such, but again you like to change the story in an attempt to make you look smarter/better/whateverer. However, the particular situation is what makes it an even better call to go for it... 1 yard and the game is over? I would imagine analytics has it near 100% to go for it on 4th and 1 if the positive outcome is game over and that includes not just on the 13 yard line. It's mind blowing to me that people actually consider giving the ball back instead of winning the game is a better play in this situation. I mean you even said that at 60% to gain a 1st down on 4th and 1 was a no brainer... unless you meant that in your world 40% > 60%. I don't mind having meaningful discussions like this, but your obsession with insulting people when you think they're wrong is mind boggling considering you're often not right. There's a handful (3) of posters who do this and it's exhausting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 79,027
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 79,027 |
The situation dictates everything. But the one size fits all crowd refuses to consider it.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
So your saying its OK to make dumb coaching decisions as long as the guys agree with it .... Hmmmm .... interesting ... i remember once when Hue did sumptin similiar ... the guys told him ... TRUST US we’ll get it done .... the O failed and then so did the D ... the response on here to ALMOST THE EXACT SAME REASONING as u just gave us here wasn’t NEAR AS SUPPORTIVE ... Same concept ... he TRUSTED the guys and showed them he has FAITH IN THEM .... Reaction was just a little different .... .... Should have read all the responses before i decided to log out ... HAUS i agree with U and Vers ... it did get cess poolie for a bit ... i also learned some things on this thread ... honestly ... I meant what i said in my initial post .. i thought is was MORONIC .... after reading and debating ... i now have softened my stance quite a bit ... wasnt as bad as i thought ... but i still think it was DUMB and i would have attempted the FG ... I learned it wasnt the no-brainer i thought it was ... but it was still STUPID and i know more than u do .... *LOL* .... just wanna make sure were clear on that ... Now ... i’ve Read all replies ... so ‘ GOOD NIGHT NOW!!!!!! PM if u have anything to say to me about this .. i’m Not even coming back ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
I'm actually kind of curious to do the "maths" on this. I'm going to completely over-simplify this, but lets get some rough percentages here.
Let's say on 4th downs, teams are 60% likely to convert. The Broncos also had 10 previous drives, and scored field goals on 3 and a touch down on one, so let's just (extremely) ballpark a 10% chance to drive and score a TD and a 30% chance to drive to score a FG.
Situation one, we go for it. Right off the bat, we have a 60% chance to win out-right. Of the 40% chance where we don't convert, we'll say the Bronco have roughly a 30% chance to drive to within FG range and convert. Yes, I get that 30% isn't exact as they would technically be trying to just get into FG range, but they can also miss, there were no timeouts left, etc. So that means, of the 40% chance we fail the 4th down, 30% of that means they would score and win, about 12% overall.
So that roughly breaks down to:
60% - We convert and win
28% - We prevent a FG and win.
12% - They kick a FG and we lose.
Scenario two, we attempt a FG. First, we'd have to look at Joseph's conversion rate. He's 87% on FGs overall but 100% on short distance FG. However, he's also 87% on PAT attempts. So let's just round up and say there's a 90% chance he hits it. Of that 10%, the Broncos would have the same 30% chance to drive down and score, so 3% overall. Of the remaining 90%, the Broncos had about a 10% chance of scoring a TD. Again, crazy-rough guesstimate, but for simplicity, let's just go with that. So, about a 9% chance of scoring a TD.
So that all breaks down to:
7% - Kicker misses, but the defense holds and we win.
81% - Kicker makes it, and the defense prevents a TD and we win.
9% - The kicker makes it, but the defense can't prevent a TD and we lose.
3% - The kicker misses, and the broncos get a field goal and we lose.
Oddly enough that works out to about a 12% chance of victory anyway, which was the same as going for it.
Not sure what that proves, if anything, but it sort of shows that either decision really isn't "right" or "wrong". I like where you're going with this. That said, I disagree with some of the percentages. The big one is the Broncos only having a 10% chance of driving down for a touchdown. This is one of the problems with using a sample size of ten drives... especially when situations change (4th down territory, end of game situation, etc.) You're saying 30% chance to get into field goal range (60 or so yard drive) but only 10% chance to drive 75 yards for a touchdown (likely 75 yard drive). Even with the advantage the defense has in a compressed field, this is too big of a disparity. In scenario two (Kick FG), I'd increase the 9% chance of "The kicker makes it, but the defense can't prevent a TD and we lose." somewhat, and decrease the 81% "Kicker makes it, and the defense prevents a TD and we win" a corresponding amount.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Thought I gave the analytics???
Going 76/75 yards for a TD with NO timeouts left.
vs.
Going 60 yards for a legit FG attempt and I was being kind in Denver 59 yarder is possibility which meant that attempt would be needing 50 yards. My math was incorrect, that 60 yards as you said was for a 49 yarder. Still in Denver 59 yards is a legitimate shot.
But analytics I guess is the pct. of success and failure.
I just thought it was logical that 75 yards in a time constraint would ALWAYS be more desirable than a team going 50-60 yards in that same time constrain to win a game.
Do you need more analytics...
Yes the game was over if achieved - I thought we made the wrong call, Play action pass would have been the play. We were doing a QB sneak when Williams rushed to call the TO, for what, a run up the middle instead?
And I don't fault Williams at all but just on a coaching stand point it was the wrong move. Not a vitally wrong move as our D was able to stop them.
I am not chastising Williams, I think he's an excellent coach just nobody is Perfect the odds in winning I think was in our favor to kick the FG.
jmho
For the record in this situation (4th and 1) for that matter 3rd n 1, also for me Two point plays.
I'd like to see that Triple RB formation with Chubb in back of Mayfield and a yard up closer on either side of Chubb Duke and Hilliard with Mayfield under Center.
They'd only have to have made 35 yds to attempt a field goal... yeah, a FG from their own 45. (a 72 yard attempt)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
The situation dictates everything. But the one size fits all crowd refuses to consider it. Interestingly enough, it is me who keeps bringing up Chubb being the leading back in the league in yards after contact. How the Broncos were down to 1 healthy cornerback. The lengthy post in one of these threads about how the thinner air in Denver can lead to all kinds of weird things, from defenses wearing down late in the game on sustained drives, to that Ravens vs Broncos playoff game where the deep safety completely misjudged the hail mary pass as it sailed over his head. The situation (meaning factors for that specific game or drive) can influence the strategy in either direction. It does not dictate everything. The reality is similar 4th and short situations come up over and over again. The one that comes up is probably not as special as you think it is.
Last edited by Haus; 12/20/18 04:27 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
deleted, not really relevant
Last edited by Haus; 12/20/18 04:44 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061 |
Offensive coordinator Freddie Kitchens would like to stay with Browns: ‘Cleveland and I get along well’ By Nate Ulrich Beacon Journal/Ohio.com Posted Dec 20, 2018 at 3:35 PM Updated Dec 20, 2018 at 3:35 PM BEREA — Freddie Kitchens swears he’ll never advertise for a coaching job, but the new offensive coordinator of the Browns will make it clear when he wants one. The former Alabama quarterback who has reinvigorated the offense would prefer to stay with the Browns and continue calling plays for quarterback Baker Mayfield beyond this season. “I like it here a lot, and everybody around here knows that I like it here,” Kitchens said Thursday during his weekly news conference. “I love the town of Cleveland. Cleveland and I get along well.” A lot will depend on who becomes the next full-time head coach of the Browns, but perhaps Kitchens will be retained after this season. They’re 4-2 since Kitchens took over as the offense’s play caller and Gregg Williams as interim coach. Those changes were made on Oct. 29, the same day the Browns (6-7-1) fired coach Hue Jackson, who’ll return to Cleveland on Sunday as a visiting assistant coach with the Cincinnati Bengals (6-8), and offensive coordinator Todd Haley. Williams didn’t select Kitchens as the offensive coordinator, though. Kitchens said owner Jimmy Haslam and General Manager John Dorsey informed him of the decision to promote him from his previous role of running backs coach/associate head coach. Dorsey is leading the search for the Browns’ ninth full-time head coach since 1999, and he’ll collaborate with ownership on the hire. “I probably wasn’t Gregg’s first choice, but, hell, I’m here. Hell, he wasn’t mine, either,” Kitchen said with a laugh. “I’m just kidding. I think both of us were put in tough situations, and I think we both have done fairly well. It’s all about the players. “It’s the players making plays and the players being good in critical situations. Sometimes, as coaches, we put a little more emphasis on ourselves than we do everybody else and more importantly it’s those other people that make you successful or not.” But coaching certainly matters in the NFL, and the Kitchens-Williams tandem has received a groundswell of support from the fan base. The Browns have more wins in their past six games than they did in their 40 with Jackson, who went 3-36-1 in 2 1/2 seasons. This past weekend on the Fox NFL Sunday pregame show, reporter Jay Glazer said the Browns are not committed to bringing back Williams but their recent success “did lock up the job for their offensive coordinator Freddie Kitchens because of the job he’s doing with Baker Mayfield. But because now they have a coach for Baker, they can open up that head coaching search. They don’t have to go find that offensive guru. They can go out and find the best guy for the job.” Kitchens was asked about Glazer’s report. “Jay, he knows more than I know, I guess,” Kitchen said. “But I’m serious when I tell you I don’t advertise for jobs. I don’t have to, and I won’t ever. I heard the other day somebody say something about I wasn’t ready to be a head coach. I mean, who the hell’s ready to be a head coach? I’m not worried about head coach, coordinator, I don’t care. I’m just trying to do the job that I’m doing right now.” OK. But is Kitchens’ goal to become a head coach? “Definitely. No doubt,” he replied. Kitchens insisted he isn’t anxious about what his fate will be after the Dec. 30 regular-season finale at Baltimore. He has worked his way up the coaching ladder, and he’ll continue to earn opportunities elsewhere if the Browns move on. “I didn’t have a dad as a coach. OK? I didn’t have a starting point in this league,” Kitchens said. “I grew up the son of a tire maker at Goodyear Tire and Rubber plant in Gadsden, Alabama. “Benjamin E. Mays said those who start behind in the game of life must run faster to catch up, and I feel like I’ve been running fast my whole life. And that’s the way it’s going to continue. So whether it’s here or what, I’m just here to do a job right now, this week and this year.” The job Kitchens has done is impressive. Mayfield and other players have praised him for his creativity and the collaborative approach he has used while game planning, picking their brains to find out which plays they’re most comfortable running. And the Browns have scored 15 touchdowns on their 16 trips into the red zone since he took control of the offense. ″[Kitchens] doesn’t have any tendencies, so you don’t know what to predict when we get down there,” wide receiver Jarvis Landry said. “So I think that that helps us a lot.” https://www.ohio.com/sports/20181220/off...-get-along-well
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
So your saying its OK to make dumb coaching decisions as long as the guys agree with it .... Hmmmm .... interesting ... i remember once when Hue did sumptin similiar ... the guys told him ... TRUST US we’ll get it done .... the O failed and then so did the D ... the response on here to ALMOST THE EXACT SAME REASONING as u just gave us here wasn’t NEAR AS SUPPORTIVE ... Same concept ... he TRUSTED the guys and showed them he has FAITH IN THEM .... Reaction was just a little different .... .... Should have read all the responses before i decided to log out ... HAUS i agree with U and Vers ... it did get cess poolie for a bit ... i also learned some things on this thread ... honestly ... I meant what i said in my initial post .. i thought is was MORONIC .... after reading and debating ... i now have softened my stance quite a bit ... wasnt as bad as i thought ... but i still think it was DUMB and i would have attempted the FG ... I learned it wasnt the no-brainer i thought it was ... but it was still STUPID and i know more than u do .... *LOL* .... just wanna make sure were clear on that ... Now ... i’ve Read all replies ... so ‘ GOOD NIGHT NOW!!!!!! PM if u have anything to say to me about this .. i’m Not even coming back ... I can't remember every single 4th down decision Hue made of course, but that was not one of my gripes with the guy. It was actually almost everything else. I probably either chimed in to defend the guy or just ignored it. I started arguing this 4th down stance so long ago that it's almost boring now. Some people get it and some don't. It's not exactly easy to change people's minds. What I've written about 4th downs is pretty much common knowledge among people who are good with numbers, whether their background is in football or not. You don't have to stick up for a coach when he goes for it on 4th down and converts. The response among most fans is, he went for it and made it, it must have been a good decision. As you can probably guess, I'm not a big fan of that kind of thinking. You don't need to defend a guy when he goes for it on 4th and makes it, you need to defend a guy when he goes for it on 4th when he's supposed to, and the team fails to convert. Part of understanding this topic is understanding that will happen sometimes, knowing about how often it will happen, and what the consequences are of that loss of field position, or likely loss of 3 points, or whatever the case may be. Some team is going to reap the benefits-- wins-- from better strategy. It might as well be the Browns. I'll send you a PM if I have anything else to respond to you specifically. Or to just say hi
Last edited by Haus; 12/20/18 05:01 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 870
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 870 |
To me Williams and staff stay on for one reason if they win out
Ticket sells
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,862
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,862 |
OK. But is Kitchens’ goal to become a head coach?
“Definitely. No doubt,” he replied. Like I said earlier, given the way he had a plan for becoming offensive coordinator, anyone want to bet that he doesn't have one for becoming head coach? The Browns have to, at the very least, interview the guy for the head coach position.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Definitely interview the guy. Unless something crazy changes though, I'm not comfortable giving the guy the head job based on a half season of being a coordinator-- even if he has done an excellent job.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,171
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,171 |
j/c
I've been split on this call since it went down, because compelling arguments can be made for either choice- as this discussion has shown.
Lemme recap the situation: 4th and 1 in the opponent's red zone. Under 2 minutes in regulation. 1 point lead. We had moved down the field pretty well to that point.
Don't know how many caught the call by Tirico as the teams lined up: "Browns- for the win."
That's kinda where I lean on this one. Convert, and the game is over. Sealed. Now, going for it wasn't a problem for me. I actually liked that we had a coach who put the game in his players' hands. Pretty sure they appreciated it, as well. What I didn't like was the particular play that was called. I think p/a would have given BM several options
"too many notes, not enough music-"
#GMStong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
I mentioned this earlier, but just as one can't assume the FG would have been good, one can not assume that you automatically win the game if you convert the 4th and 1.
Earlier in the year, Baker picked up the first down, but fumbled it backwards out of bound. Turnover on downs. Likewise, let's say we gained a yard for the first down and then threw a pick on the next play. Or fumbled on the a play after the first down. Or fumbled the ball out of the endzone for a touchback. Or got an illegal procedure penalty after picking up the first down. Or a holding call. Or a sack.
There are no guarantees about any of it. All of that got ignored in my previous post due to the agenda crap. I think as a HC, you have to weigh all the possibilities that I mentioned earlier and make your decision.
At the end of the day, I kick the FG, [and no, that doesn't make me an old-timer who can't change w/the times as some will argue to demean another's perspective.] However, I really don't have a problem w/Williams going for it. Games are won and lost by plays that are made or not made through the course of the game. And I don't think one can definitively say their opinion is the only one that is correct.
Btw------I made this post to you because I figured you would understand I am not attacking you due your post being very neutral and level-headed. I did want to dispute the guaranteed win aspect that is being presented by a few folks, though.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Coaching Search Continued
|
|
