NFL GDT: 2023 NFC Championship Game: (1) San Francisco 49ers vs (3) Detroit Lions

[Unholy Diver]

Go on?

Did you see the post where Badgley is 13-24 from 45-50 yards?

There is risk in both situations.

The Lions need to get a better kicker

 

[Romang67]

 

[JetsWillFly4Ever]

Careful, stats don't matter in this thread cause that 49ers D is so good man!

(Lions had been dominating on offense all day)

 

[Romang67]

Careful, stats don't matter in this thread cause that 49ers D is so good man!

(Lions had been dominating on offense all day)

Turns out it's super easy to decide plays using hindsight.

 

[Donnie740]

Turns out it's super easy to decide plays using hindsight.

Casual football fans likely didn’t recognize the coaching mistakes as they were occurring, but I can assure you there was ZERO hindsight required from anywho understands the game.

Other than a few contrarian media shills and some Madden ‘23 video gamers, virtually every single player, coach and executive ripped Campbell’s terrible gambles.

I could understand if the opinion was somewhat split, but when the people actually involved with football are in universal agreement that it was two terrible mistakes, you lose all credibility trying so hard to defend Campbell’s incompetence.

 

[Romang67]

Casual football fans likely didn’t recognize the coaching mistakes as they were occurring, but I can assure you there was ZERO hindsight required from anywho understands the game.

Other than a few contrarian media shills and some Madden ‘23 video gamers, virtually every single player, coach and executive ripped Campbell’s terrible gambles.

I could understand if the opinion was somewhat split, but when the people actually involved with football are in universal agreement that it was two terrible mistakes, you lose all credibility trying so hard to defend Campbell’s incompetence.

Oh, I'm sure it comes down to your not being a casual. That's probably it.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

So basically he passed up a 55% chance at getting no points in favor of a 25% chance at getting no points and people can't get over themselves.

It's just objectively the right call.

 

[Romang67]

So basically he passed up a 55% chance at getting no points in favor of a 25% chance at getting no points and people can't get over themselves.

It's just objectively the right call.

People view field goals as near automatic for some reason. I suppose the last time a kicker missed a field goal from that distance was several in-game minutes earlier, so it's easy to forget.

 

[Donnie740]

So basically he passed up a 55% chance at getting no points in favor of a 25% chance at getting no points and people can't get over themselves.

It's just objectively the right call.

You don’t understand how probabilities work, do you?

Having a 75% chance of converting the 4th down still means you’ve still got to either score a touchdown or a FG to get points.

What’s the probability of a turnover? What’s the probability of getting penalized and getting pushed out of FG range? What’s the probability of getting sacked out of FG range?

Multiply all of those probabilities and then you’ll see how asinine those decisions were.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

You don’t understand how probabilities work, do you?

Having a 75% chance of converting the 4th down still means you’ve still got to either score a touchdown or a FG to get points.

What’s the probability of a turnover? What’s the probability of getting penalized and getting pushed out of FG range? What’s the probability of getting sacked out of FG range?

Multiply all of those probabilities and then you’ll see how asinine those decisions were.

What the hell are you talking about. They have a 75% conversion rate, what they do after doesn't matter.

The FG attempt has a 45% conversion rate.

Those are the only two probabilities that matter on that play.

Saying they shouldn't go for it because there's a chance they might turn it over afterwards is honestly one the stupidest things ever written on the Internet.

 

[MMC]

 

[Donnie740]

That’s pretty much the refrain from all players and coaches, past and present.

 

[Donnie740]

What the hell are you talking about. They have a 75% conversion rate, what they do after doesn't matter.

The FG attempt has a 45% conversion rate.

Those are the only two probabilities that matter on that play.

Saying they shouldn't go for it because there's a chance they might turn it over afterwards is honestly one the stupidest things ever written on the Internet.

Having a 75% probability of converting on 4th and 2 does not mean they have a 75% probability of scoring a touchdown.

And since the primary objective in football is to outscore the other team, points are important.

So while converting the 4th down gamble would be wonderful, getting points from the drive is the ultimate goal.

Which means you have to factor in the myriad variables that would prevent points from being achieved even if they realize that 75% probability of converting the 4th down.

You seem very confused by this.

 

[TheAngryHank]

Damn that was a rough one. kick the damn field goal dan. totally gave back momentum to the 9ers. what a bad decision. smh. oh well it was a fun game and a great season. disappointing it ended on a coaches ego as the players played well.

I don't think Dan trusts his kicker

 

[hatterson]

 

[hatterson]

Having a 75% probability of converting on 4th and 2 does not mean they have a 75% probability of scoring a touchdown.

And since the primary objective in football is to outscore the other team, points are important.

So while converting the 4th down gamble would be wonderful, getting points from the drive is the ultimate goal.

Which means you have to factor in the myriad variables that would prevent points from being achieved even if they realize that 75% probability of converting the 4th down.

You seem very confused by this.

You have a 75% chance to convert the 4th down.

If you succeed you’re in an objectively better position than you were. Everyone can agree that 1st and 10 from the 37 is better than 4th and 3 from the 40 or whatever the yard lines were.

Sure you *might* go backwards, or throw an INT, or fumble, but everyone should be able to agree that you have a higher expected points (average points expected on the drive) in the former scenario compared to the latter.

 

[Romang67]

You don’t understand how probabilities work, do you?

Having a 75% chance of converting the 4th down still means you’ve still got to either score a touchdown or a FG to get points.

What’s the probability of a turnover? What’s the probability of getting penalized and getting pushed out of FG range? What’s the probability of getting sacked out of FG range?

Multiply all of those probabilities and then you’ll see how asinine those decisions were.

I understand conditional probabilities. In fact, I understand them so well that I know that you can't just multiply those probabilities.

Turns out it's vastly more likely that, in the event that the 4th down in converted, the Lions proceed to advance the ball. As @hatterson said, their expected points (and in this case, added win probability from eating time of the clock) go way up from that distance since they're inching closer to a distance where they would trust their kicker, it's more likely that they score a touchdown, and various other factors that makes it better to be closer to your opponents' end zone than not.

That math degree coming in handy.

 

[Romang67]

Scenario 1: the Lions make the 4th down. At this point, they have a 1st down at whatever yardage. If they don't advance the ball, they have an easier kick. If they advance the ball, they add expected points to the drive. They also take 2+ minutes off the clock. Or, yes, they can turn the ball over or take a penalty, which happens sometimes and is part of the calculation of expected points per drive. Turns out it doesn't happen particularly often, and is a weird reason for not wanting to go for it on 4th. If penalties push them behind the previous line of scrimmage, they eat some time off the clock and punt the ball away pushing the Niners closer to their end zone. This is a much better scenario than missing a field goal.

Scenario 2: The Lions make the kick. It's now a 3 score game. The 49ers have managed to force field goals on 2 consecutive Lions drives after allowing 21 points on their first three drives, so if you're way into momentum, I imagine the momentum is starting to shift as well.

The kick wouldn't have been from 48+ yards, but it would have been 45 yards in a hostile environment and clearly not at a distance where Campbell felt comfortable Badgley would hit it, so I don't think it's outrageous to say that his chances of making it was less than 75%.

Scenario 3: The Lions fail the 4th down. The ball is turned over on the line of scrimmage. Momentum is with the Niners if you feel particularly strongly about momentum.

Scenario 4: The Lions miss the kick. The ball is turned over 7 yards farther away from the Niners end zone. Momentum is with the Niners if you feel particularly strongly about momentum. Starting a drive 7 yards further up the field adds expected points from the drive.

Unconfirmed, but some quick Google fu unearthed a claim that Badgley, when kicking between 40-49 yards outside, not in Denver, and not in his rookie season, he's 63%. He has not made a kick over 45 yards outside and not in Denver since 2020. He's not a very good kicker.

 

[hatterson]

I think it’s worth differentiating between the two second half fourth downs as well.

I’m very much a “coaches should go for it way, way more often than they do” guy, but I would have totally understood and supported kicking a long FG to try to go up 3 scores unless you had zero faith in your kicker. I also totally understand and support the mindset of “go for it, make the first down, and get a TD to go up 21 and really kill this game”

The second one is a different type of discussion. Do you kick a long FG to tie it up and let the niners offense, which has been abusing you all half, do what they want to try to slowly kill the game off with a late FG or do you got for it, kill another 3-5 minutes off the game and count on getting a TD with 2 mins left or whatever and then hoping your D can hold them to a bad TD attempt in short time?

The first situation is far more about your kicker and your faith in him. The second is a combo of the kicker the defense.

The big coaching error I saw was the third down run at the end of the game that put them in a situation where they had to recover an onside kick.

Recovering an onside kick the opposing team knowing is coming is, at absolute best, a 20% chance and that’s being really generous. If you’re planning on going for the TD there (and not kicking the FG), then if you want to call a run you’d only do it on 4th down since if you fail it then you’re lost anyway.

Also funny that no one is complaining about Campbell going for it on 4th and goal from the 3 at the end of the game when they could have “taken the points” and tried the same onside kick. But it worked out so no one is complaining about it, which tells you all you need to know about how logically grounded those complaints actually are.

 

[Donnie740]

Also funny that no one is complaining about Campbell going for it on 4th and goal from the 3 at the end of the game when they could have “taken the points” and tried the same onside kick. But it worked out so no one is complaining about it, which tells you all you need to know about how logically grounded those complaints actually are.

You can’t be serious with that comment.

Trying to compare the difference between being up by 14 midway through the 3rdQ to being down by 10 with a minute remaining in the game is like comparing apples to roller coasters.

You should be comparing the 4th and 2 at the end of the 1stH with the 4th and 2 in the 3rdQ both instances they were up by 14.

I commented on this immediately and pointed out how inconsistent Campbell’s decision making was. Like calling a running play for St Brown on 3rd and 4.

It was an all round terrible day for Campbell’s play calling.

 

[hatterson]

You can’t be serious with that comment.

Trying to compare the difference between being up by 14 midway through the 3rdQ to being down by 10 with a minute remaining in the game is like comparing apples to roller coasters.

You should be comparing the 4th and 2 at the end of the 1stH with the 4th and 2 in the 3rdQ both instances they were up by 14.

I commented on this immediately and pointed out how inconsistent Campbell’s decision making was. Like calling a running play for St Brown on 3rd and 4.

It was an all round terrible day for Campbell’s play calling.

I agree it was a bit inconsistent, but it’s entirely consistent if he doesn’t really trust his kicker from mid 40s or further.

A FG from the 3 is basically a guarantee. A FG from the 40 or wherever it was is maybe 75% at best with that kicker (likely lower)

The comparison is that in both situations he was trying to maximize the chances of winning. At the end he determined that it was a better option to go for a TD on 4th down and then try for a FG after the onside kick than to kick a FG then and try for a TD after the onside kick.

If the “take the points” crowd is being logically consistent, they should have been upset that Campbell didn’t kick the FG to take the “guaranteed” points and then try for a TD after the onside kick instead of going for the TD on 4th down and potentially losing the game even before an onside kick.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

 

[Donnie740]

I agree it was a bit inconsistent, but it’s entirely consistent if he doesn’t really trust his kicker from mid 40s or further.

A FG from the 3 is basically a guarantee. A FG from the 40 or wherever it was is maybe 75% at best with that kicker (likely lower)

The comparison is that in both situations he was trying to maximize the chances of winning. At the end he determined that it was a better option to go for a TD on 4th down and then try for a FG after the onside kick than to kick a FG then and try for a TD after the onside kick.

If the “take the points” crowd is being logically consistent, they should have been upset that Campbell didn’t kick the FG to take the “guaranteed” points and then try for a TD after the onside kick instead of going for the TD on 4th down and potentially losing the game even before an onside kick.

Once again, it comes down to making decisions based on the flow of the game and the situation in that moment.

Keyshawn made a great point in saying that you have to trust your kicker until he gives you reason not to trust him. Because if you don’t trust him, why do you have him on the team?

That’s coming from a former player who understands the game - - not some clueless media shill or a Madden ‘23 video gamer.

 

[GKJ]

You can’t be serious with that comment.

Trying to compare the difference between being up by 14 midway through the 3rdQ to being down by 10 with a minute remaining in the game is like comparing apples to roller coasters.

You should be comparing the 4th and 2 at the end of the 1stH with the 4th and 2 in the 3rdQ both instances they were up by 14.

I commented on this immediately and pointed out how inconsistent Campbell’s decision making was. Like calling a running play for St Brown on 3rd and 4.

It was an all round terrible day for Campbell’s play calling.

Campbell doesn’t call plays.

 

[hatterson]

Once again, it comes down to making decisions based on the flow of the game and the situation in that moment.

Keyshawn made a great point in saying that you have to trust your kicker until he gives you reason not to trust him. Because if you don’t trust him, why do you have him on the team?

That’s coming from a former player who understands the game - - not some clueless media shill or a Madden ‘23 video gamer.

1.) the kicker did give a reason not to trust him. In fact they had cut the kicker and wanted to move on because he wasn’t good enough. The issue is that the replacement guy was even worse so they had to bring him back partway through the season. The reason he was on the team is because he was the least bad of the bad options they had.

2.) “you have to trust your kicker” isn’t a coherent position to take unless you’re also saying “you have to trust your QB” and “you have to trust your WR”
“You have to trust your kicker” also doesn’t square with “making decisions based on the flow of the game and the situation in the moment”

3.) I don’t understand the appeal to authority by quoting former players and talking about video games. Campbell isn’t some 35 year old stat nerd whose qualifications are an advanced math degree and a bunch of playing madden. He’s been a football guy his entire life with a decade long playing career and now nearly a decade and a half of coaching. He’s a football dudes football dude.