Vrabel punts on 4th and 2 at the Ravens 40 in the 4th quarter down 4 points. Analytics have it at almost 100% go for it. And the Titans lose the game. I wonder if 20 years later, everyone will laugh at ever punting in a situation like that.
Printable View
Vrabel punts on 4th and 2 at the Ravens 40 in the 4th quarter down 4 points. Analytics have it at almost 100% go for it. And the Titans lose the game. I wonder if 20 years later, everyone will laugh at ever punting in a situation like that.
It?s a coaching disease that runs rampant in old school coaches. After the punt, Baltimore had the ball back where TN punted from after 2 plays. It?s beyond stupid
I think that's a dumb punt. I think analytics can get you in trouble too though. Frank Reich is a really big analytic guy. Yesterday, he passed up on a fg late 2nd quarter to go on 4th and goal from the 4. Maybe I go it's 2 yards or less, but 4? No way. He lost game by 3.
You have to remember most coaches are PE majors.
Coming from a baseball perspective on this and speaking in general on analytics...
I think you can go too heavy in one direction or the other. I think analytics and "traditional" thought are best used together to make a most informed decision.
The funny thing about analytics in baseball is I think it has gotten so shifted in another direction of thought that the results are probably coming out in the wash.
I think where there is a disconnect with most fans that I see between the two is you have a stat where something should be done "in general" but I think a coach has to know his personnel and what they are capable of on an individual/group level to make that most informed decision.
Now I will say this- if that were my team I would want the coach to go for it. So I'm not saying that the right decision was made here but I think fans need to keep in mind that it's not always as easy as looking at a book from Bill James and doing what the book says.
It's different at the NFL level. Those guys are typically pretty bright CEO types. You can't be Bobby Hall and run a NFL or even a D-1 college team. And these coaches have to answer to the media about their decisions and most teams have analytical staffs so they're aware of what the stats say to do in most instances.
Belicheck - has a degree in economics
Saban has a business degree
Leach has a law degree
Urban Meyer has a psychology degree
Mike Tomlin has a Sociology degree
Dabo Sweeney has a Business Admin degree
Ryan Day Business Admin
Brian Kelly- Political Science
Mike McCarthy- Business Admin
Ron Rivera- Criminal Justice
Sean McDermott- Finance
I could keep going but no need
Just curious, but I would love to know their ACT score and GPA (that's not sarcasm, I really would like to know). And they are coaching guys who struggle on the Wonderlic. Coaches have a gazillion things to think about in a short amount of time. If they decide something just 5 seconds too late, it could lead to a delay of game penalty or using a timeout.
From working around high school coaches, I'm always surprised how stubborn they are, unwilling to embrace new ideas.
I suspect most of your DI head coaches are well above average intellects. There may be a few that are good managers without being particularly bright themselves, but I suspect they are a small minority. If you are a coordinator and not smart enough to get x's and o's and make quick decisions, it's going to be hard to get to a head coach position. Maybe a few that also rise to where they are through recruiting (where too much intelligence could actually be a drawback b/c it makes it harder to relate to high school students in general), but I doubt they last long if they aren't also reasonable smart so that they can manage a program (cough, Pruitt, cough).
Coaches do stupid shit like trying to cover Davonta Smith deep with a MLB...
I heard an analyst talking about that very play. I think it was Matt Wyatt, not sure.
They never intended for a MLB to be covering Smith. The point was that the combination of Sark's scheme (presnap-motions) along with Smith's speed/quick direction changes kept them so off balance that they just were over matched once the play began.
Ohio State was trying to give help over the top and that left so many other things wide open underneath. That plan worked great vs Clemson but not Bama. It was an impressive scene.
Pretty easy to get surprised by a gimmick for one game and not be able to figure out an adjustment during the game, even if it comes to you pretty easy afterwards.
Don't think what Bama was doing is a gimmick as much as it is just a good scheme that is hard to cover combined with OSU feeling like more linebackers got their best players on the field and that resulting in them getting caught in mismatches more than if they had put more DBs out there.
Bump for Lafleur and GB. Congrats on having this coach disease
Arians went for it on fourth and 3 at end of first half and they wound up getting a td which was the difference in the game and then lafleour wussed out on fourth and goal and never saw the ball again. Gotta have big stones to win the big ring, lafleour don't have em right now.
Some of them are too scared to succeed. Honestly, if our coaches try to make an aggressive decision and it doesn't work I try not to be too hard on them personally unless they call a high risk play like Dan on the goal line in 2009 when AD probably would have scored. And had Dan given the ball to AD and gotten stopped I wouldn't have said a thing.
Lefleur thought he was smarter than literally everyone watching the game
The head coach made a really stupid decision to not go for it but Rogers not running it in when he had nothing but green grass and the endzone in front of him was equally as dumb.