LittleG
Norm Smith Medallist
- Nov 18, 2015
- 9,112
- 10,856
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Rule no 1, delete your old social media regularly. Just in case it’s your 15 minutes of fame this week.
Rule no 2, don’t ask Satan for advice.
-
AFLW Draft - Tonight at 7PM
The livestream will be available on womens.afl & the AFLW app. Join our live chat!
-
Tip Round 16 in Tipping - Weekly Platinum Membership prize.
Presented by The Golden Ticket - For Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the MCG and Marvel.
Round 15 Winner: bh90210fan
NFL SUPER BOWL LVI - CINCINNATI BENGALS vs LOS ANGLES RAMS
- Thread starter balmainforever
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Rule no 1, delete your old social media regularly. Just in case it’s your 15 minutes of fame this week.
Rule no 2, don’t ask Satan for advice.
revo333
Premiership Player
- Jan 7, 2018
- 4,824
- 4,090
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
In that moment..
A poor reaction but not sure he has to wear a tag saying 'scumbag' for the rest of his life over it.
We are quick to judge professional athletes on their slightest slip ups but most do a lot of good things that we never hear about.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 134,580
- 83,752
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Let's be honest....if we're drunk as skunks like Stafford was, and we were just gallivanting about the city at night, and someone fell over, hit their head on a sign post, went to sit down and their chair flipped backwards...etc....we'd probably laugh and/or turn away from having to deal with it, or just imagine it's not a serious accident.
Our faculties are affected by booze and drugs. People do other kinds of stupid things like start fights, dancing on tables, yelling and shouting, singing out loud, hugging people and declaring love, running off and getting hitched, or the usual one night stands, crashing on the side of the curb and vomiting all over ourselves. All that kind of stuff.
Staffords wife was probably not drunk at all, and so her faculties were there. I think Stafford even made a gesture/word to his wife to go deal with the woman -- because -- he knew he was too drunk to be of much help.
If Stafford was not drunk, the natural instinct in all of us would be there to rush over and help the woman. It's instinctual, human nature. When you're not out of it, and you're standing there, and you see an accident, you immediately drop your jaw, say omg, and judging the severity, say hey are you ok, rush over, see how you can help, call an ambulance or whatever. We've all seen ourselves react that exact same way when we're not out of it and happen to witness an accident.
Our faculties are affected by booze and drugs. People do other kinds of stupid things like start fights, dancing on tables, yelling and shouting, singing out loud, hugging people and declaring love, running off and getting hitched, or the usual one night stands, crashing on the side of the curb and vomiting all over ourselves. All that kind of stuff.
Staffords wife was probably not drunk at all, and so her faculties were there. I think Stafford even made a gesture/word to his wife to go deal with the woman -- because -- he knew he was too drunk to be of much help.
If Stafford was not drunk, the natural instinct in all of us would be there to rush over and help the woman. It's instinctual, human nature. When you're not out of it, and you're standing there, and you see an accident, you immediately drop your jaw, say omg, and judging the severity, say hey are you ok, rush over, see how you can help, call an ambulance or whatever. We've all seen ourselves react that exact same way when we're not out of it and happen to witness an accident.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 134,580
- 83,752
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
It's also a truth that our true colors come out when we're drunk. Stafford probably does have a certain self-centeredness about him, and like most star athletes think they're above everyday people. Outliers like Whitworth, etc, exist. But the majority of celebs, star athletes, and big wigs in politics/business...they're all usually intolerable types. We've all seen or heard stories of them. Even things when they pull the "don't you know who I am?" when they don't get preferential treatment from regular workers in the service industry.
- Jul 26, 2016
- 3,780
- 5,179
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- LFC, Brisbane Lions
you add Scherff, Gronk/Ertz and a RG and the Bengals will be close to it again
- Sep 6, 2005
- 134,580
- 83,752
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
anti-analytics rant 
Twitter is rife with reminders that there’s no football to watch today. Here’s an idea — watch the Super Bowl again.
That’s what I’m doing. And I’ll have some thoughts as I do it. I’ll post some of them, because I’m bored. Because there’s no football to watch today.
Here’s an item regarding the first big decision from Super Bowl LVI. Facing fourth at one from the L.A. 49, the Bengals went for it. They failed to convert, with a short throw from quarterback Joe Burrow to receiver Ja'Marr Chase landing incomplete, the pass broken up by Rams linebacker Ernest Jones.
As to the key question of whether the Bengals should have gone for it or punted, the NFL’s Next Gen Stats account on Twitter explained that, based on the Next Gen Stats Decision Guide, the Cincinnati win percentage by going for it in that spot was 27 percent, and the win percentage by punting was 25 percent. Going for it prevailed by a 1.9 percent margin.
So what? With 55 minutes left to be played in the game, a 1.9-percent ultimate-victory margin means nothing. The outcome of a fourth and short in that setting has negligible relevance to the outcome of a game that has barely gotten started.
Run the numbers with 10 minutes left in the fourth quarter? Fine. With 10 minutes left in the first quarter, it’s just plain goofy. Too much still has to happen in the game, and the outcome ultimately will turn on something far more consequential than the outcome of the opening drive by the Bengals.
This is a prime example of the manner in which hyper-reliance on analytics overtakes common sense. The Bengals eventually throttled the L.A. offense on the opening drive. Why not trust the punt team to pin Matthew Stafford and company deep in their own end of the field for the second drive of the game? Why not get into a field-position battle for the first score?
That’s what the Bengals did, frankly. They surrendered field position, gave the Rams the ball only 51 yards from the end zone, and watched Stafford lead L.A. on the drive that delivered the opening touchdown.
By going for it, the Bengal tried to retain possession, obviously, and to position themselves to notch the first points. This is where the process of converting should not be regarded as mechanical but as strategic and dependent on preparation and execution.
What play did coach Zac Taylor have ready for that spot? How well would his players run it? What should quarterback Joe Burrow be looking for before he throws the ball?
The play could have worked. Receiver Tee Higgins, who was in motion from left to right before the snap, ended up wide open after safety Nick Scott collided with cornerback Jalen Ramsey. If Burrow had noticed, he could have had an easy first down. Instead, Burrow thought Chase was open, not realizing that Jones had broken toward the ball.
The effort to boil outcomes down to percentages overlooks that the go-for-it decision opens the door to various factors like that. It’s not a coin-flip or a single-factor proposition, like kicking an extra point or a field goal. It’s about play design, play selection, preparation, execution, defensive effectiveness, and the ability of the players to seize an opportunity that arises, or not.
Finally, the officials missed a fairly obvious post-play taunt by Ramsey, who stood over Chase with the same kind of posture that drew plenty of flags all season long. Yes, the rule sucks. Not enforcing it consistently sucks even more. The Rams should have started the drive from their own 34, not from their own 49.
Here’s the bottom line. Decisions made and not made that early don’t decide the game. Whether going for it or punting provides an incremental bump as to the eventual winning percentage should be ignored. What matters is whether the head coach believes that his offense can and will create a better outcome than trying to pin the Rams deep in their own end and hoping to keep them from driving the length of the field. The Cincinnati offense, in that moment, didn’t get it done.
On opening drive of Super Bowl, should Bengals have punted?
Posted by Mike Florio on February 20, 2022, 11:13 AM ESTTwitter is rife with reminders that there’s no football to watch today. Here’s an idea — watch the Super Bowl again.
That’s what I’m doing. And I’ll have some thoughts as I do it. I’ll post some of them, because I’m bored. Because there’s no football to watch today.
Here’s an item regarding the first big decision from Super Bowl LVI. Facing fourth at one from the L.A. 49, the Bengals went for it. They failed to convert, with a short throw from quarterback Joe Burrow to receiver Ja'Marr Chase landing incomplete, the pass broken up by Rams linebacker Ernest Jones.
As to the key question of whether the Bengals should have gone for it or punted, the NFL’s Next Gen Stats account on Twitter explained that, based on the Next Gen Stats Decision Guide, the Cincinnati win percentage by going for it in that spot was 27 percent, and the win percentage by punting was 25 percent. Going for it prevailed by a 1.9 percent margin.
So what? With 55 minutes left to be played in the game, a 1.9-percent ultimate-victory margin means nothing. The outcome of a fourth and short in that setting has negligible relevance to the outcome of a game that has barely gotten started.
Run the numbers with 10 minutes left in the fourth quarter? Fine. With 10 minutes left in the first quarter, it’s just plain goofy. Too much still has to happen in the game, and the outcome ultimately will turn on something far more consequential than the outcome of the opening drive by the Bengals.
This is a prime example of the manner in which hyper-reliance on analytics overtakes common sense. The Bengals eventually throttled the L.A. offense on the opening drive. Why not trust the punt team to pin Matthew Stafford and company deep in their own end of the field for the second drive of the game? Why not get into a field-position battle for the first score?
That’s what the Bengals did, frankly. They surrendered field position, gave the Rams the ball only 51 yards from the end zone, and watched Stafford lead L.A. on the drive that delivered the opening touchdown.
By going for it, the Bengal tried to retain possession, obviously, and to position themselves to notch the first points. This is where the process of converting should not be regarded as mechanical but as strategic and dependent on preparation and execution.
What play did coach Zac Taylor have ready for that spot? How well would his players run it? What should quarterback Joe Burrow be looking for before he throws the ball?
The play could have worked. Receiver Tee Higgins, who was in motion from left to right before the snap, ended up wide open after safety Nick Scott collided with cornerback Jalen Ramsey. If Burrow had noticed, he could have had an easy first down. Instead, Burrow thought Chase was open, not realizing that Jones had broken toward the ball.
The effort to boil outcomes down to percentages overlooks that the go-for-it decision opens the door to various factors like that. It’s not a coin-flip or a single-factor proposition, like kicking an extra point or a field goal. It’s about play design, play selection, preparation, execution, defensive effectiveness, and the ability of the players to seize an opportunity that arises, or not.
Finally, the officials missed a fairly obvious post-play taunt by Ramsey, who stood over Chase with the same kind of posture that drew plenty of flags all season long. Yes, the rule sucks. Not enforcing it consistently sucks even more. The Rams should have started the drive from their own 34, not from their own 49.
Here’s the bottom line. Decisions made and not made that early don’t decide the game. Whether going for it or punting provides an incremental bump as to the eventual winning percentage should be ignored. What matters is whether the head coach believes that his offense can and will create a better outcome than trying to pin the Rams deep in their own end and hoping to keep them from driving the length of the field. The Cincinnati offense, in that moment, didn’t get it done.
LittleG
Norm Smith Medallist
- Nov 18, 2015
- 9,112
- 10,856
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
anti-analytics rant
On opening drive of Super Bowl, should Bengals have punted?
Posted by Mike Florio on February 20, 2022, 11:13 AM EST
Twitter is rife with reminders that there’s no football to watch today. Here’s an idea — watch the Super Bowl again.
That’s what I’m doing. And I’ll have some thoughts as I do it. I’ll post some of them, because I’m bored. Because there’s no football to watch today.
Here’s an item regarding the first big decision from Super Bowl LVI. Facing fourth at one from the L.A. 49, the Bengals went for it. They failed to convert, with a short throw from quarterback Joe Burrow to receiver Ja'Marr Chase landing incomplete, the pass broken up by Rams linebacker Ernest Jones.
As to the key question of whether the Bengals should have gone for it or punted, the NFL’s Next Gen Stats account on Twitter explained that, based on the Next Gen Stats Decision Guide, the Cincinnati win percentage by going for it in that spot was 27 percent, and the win percentage by punting was 25 percent. Going for it prevailed by a 1.9 percent margin.
So what? With 55 minutes left to be played in the game, a 1.9-percent ultimate-victory margin means nothing. The outcome of a fourth and short in that setting has negligible relevance to the outcome of a game that has barely gotten started.
Run the numbers with 10 minutes left in the fourth quarter? Fine. With 10 minutes left in the first quarter, it’s just plain goofy. Too much still has to happen in the game, and the outcome ultimately will turn on something far more consequential than the outcome of the opening drive by the Bengals.
This is a prime example of the manner in which hyper-reliance on analytics overtakes common sense. The Bengals eventually throttled the L.A. offense on the opening drive. Why not trust the punt team to pin Matthew Stafford and company deep in their own end of the field for the second drive of the game? Why not get into a field-position battle for the first score?
That’s what the Bengals did, frankly. They surrendered field position, gave the Rams the ball only 51 yards from the end zone, and watched Stafford lead L.A. on the drive that delivered the opening touchdown.
By going for it, the Bengal tried to retain possession, obviously, and to position themselves to notch the first points. This is where the process of converting should not be regarded as mechanical but as strategic and dependent on preparation and execution.
What play did coach Zac Taylor have ready for that spot? How well would his players run it? What should quarterback Joe Burrow be looking for before he throws the ball?
The play could have worked. Receiver Tee Higgins, who was in motion from left to right before the snap, ended up wide open after safety Nick Scott collided with cornerback Jalen Ramsey. If Burrow had noticed, he could have had an easy first down. Instead, Burrow thought Chase was open, not realizing that Jones had broken toward the ball.
The effort to boil outcomes down to percentages overlooks that the go-for-it decision opens the door to various factors like that. It’s not a coin-flip or a single-factor proposition, like kicking an extra point or a field goal. It’s about play design, play selection, preparation, execution, defensive effectiveness, and the ability of the players to seize an opportunity that arises, or not.
Finally, the officials missed a fairly obvious post-play taunt by Ramsey, who stood over Chase with the same kind of posture that drew plenty of flags all season long. Yes, the rule sucks. Not enforcing it consistently sucks even more. The Rams should have started the drive from their own 34, not from their own 49.
Here’s the bottom line. Decisions made and not made that early don’t decide the game. Whether going for it or punting provides an incremental bump as to the eventual winning percentage should be ignored. What matters is whether the head coach believes that his offense can and will create a better outcome than trying to pin the Rams deep in their own end and hoping to keep them from driving the length of the field. The Cincinnati offense, in that moment, didn’t get it done.
I am a big believer in going for fourth and one. This decision though is wrong. A punt is clearly the better choice, as starting your opponent backed up close to their goal line is more likely to lead to a win.
One thing that analytics doesn’t take into account is the ability of the punter to make that play. It should be easy for a punter and IF they didn’t trust him, get a new punter.
- Mar 21, 2016
- 63,525
- 97,814
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Sturt, Redskins , White Sox
Field position is king
Any decision should factor in where the ball is now v where the ball can be
Any decision should factor in where the ball is now v where the ball can be
- Sep 6, 2005
- 134,580
- 83,752
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
It's the same too refusing the easy FGs very early in games, often failing to convert 4th, and then later in the game find themselves losing or lose by the same or less margin as the amount of early FGs they chose against taking.
Im not rigidly against analytics decisions. It's more applicable by time and situation imo.
But what makes it disliked is how the analytics people in the NFL, gaining more and more control, arent happy with time and situation use, they want the whole game start to finish to be ruled by analytics decisions. Its like a secret takeover going on.
And then reading thru all the media opinion pieces on twitter, how analytics-focused they are, defending wrong decisions etc
Im not rigidly against analytics decisions. It's more applicable by time and situation imo.
But what makes it disliked is how the analytics people in the NFL, gaining more and more control, arent happy with time and situation use, they want the whole game start to finish to be ruled by analytics decisions. Its like a secret takeover going on.
And then reading thru all the media opinion pieces on twitter, how analytics-focused they are, defending wrong decisions etc
- Sep 6, 2005
- 134,580
- 83,752
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
The team that won the opening coin toss of the super bowl has now lost the game eight tines in a row.
Coupled with the dominance of the white jersey.
You can't choose to lose the toss, but you can try to even it out by choosing the white jersey.
Coupled with the dominance of the white jersey.
You can't choose to lose the toss, but you can try to even it out by choosing the white jersey.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 134,580
- 83,752
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Matthew Stafford: I wish I had a better reaction in the moment when the photographer fell
Posted by Michael David Smith on February 24, 2022, 6:36 AM ESTRams quarterback Matthew Stafford took some criticism when he just turned around and walked away after a photographer fell off the stage at the team’s post-Super Bowl celebration. Stafford and the Rams later pledged to pay her hospital bills and replace her broken cameras, but Stafford still wishes he had handled it differently.
Speaking on his wife Kelly Stafford’s podcast, Stafford acknowledged he wishes he would have checked on her immediately.
“Yeah, I mean, that obviously happened really quickly and suddenly and unexpectedly, and wish I had a better reaction in the moment,” Stafford said, via Today.com. “I didn’t. I apologized to her for that, but glad that all in all she’s doing all right.”
Stafford called it “one of those things you try to train your reactions to be a little bit better next time.”
Kelly Stafford did check on the photographer immediately, and although she initially seemed fine, when she later posted on social media that she was injured, the Staffords vowed to take care of her.
“Long story short, we followed up with her,” Kelly Stafford said. “The moment we got in the car, Matthew actually looked at me and said, ‘Hey, will you contact the Rams, ask how she’s doing?’ Did that, they’re like, ‘We think she’s going to be OK.’ We sent her flowers. Next day we wake up, [she’s] not OK.”
- Oct 18, 2013
- 65,339
- 82,436
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers. Zach Wilson.
You dont train for instinctual reactions, what is wrong with you, you either have empathy or you dont.
- Sep 7, 2008
- 46,234
- 29,636
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Leicester City, Philadelphia Eagles
I'm curious as to what the training looks like...
- Feb 28, 2009
- 34,383
- 30,751
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Baltimore Ravens, Atletico
Surprise trust falls
Do the Bengals get back to the Super Bowl with Burrow at QB, or is this his Marino moment, never to return? I feel the latter.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 134,580
- 83,752
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
They could as equally as they couldn't. AFC pumping with bunches of top tier young QBs. So it'll be hard to get thru.
- Feb 7, 2010
- 32,572
- 28,799
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Green Bay Packers, Stanford
- Moderator
- #1,770
Or one of those hidden camera shows from the early 2000s
INDIANAPOLIS — As the NFL’s competition committee began four days of meetings at the league’s scouting combine, its chairman said Sunday that there is “no question” the group will study proposals to modify the league’s overtime format.
“I have no question it will be brought up,” said Rich McKay, also the president of the Atlanta Falcons. “I have no question that there will be a team or two that is going to suggest a rule change.”
The Indianapolis Colts submitted a proposal that would guarantee each team at least one possession in overtime, both in regular season and postseason games, a person familiar with the situation said later Sunday.
“I have no question it will be brought up,” said Rich McKay, also the president of the Atlanta Falcons. “I have no question that there will be a team or two that is going to suggest a rule change.”
The Indianapolis Colts submitted a proposal that would guarantee each team at least one possession in overtime, both in regular season and postseason games, a person familiar with the situation said later Sunday.
Similar threads
