MacReady Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 Nobody is wrong here. It's not necessarily a mistake to keep McCarthy. He can still have success. It's not necessarily a mistake to fire McCarthy. A different head coach could do better. I just wish both sides understood that. Nobody in this argument is 100% right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted November 18, 2018 Author Share Posted November 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Breesus mode said: Hate to break in here, but nobody really thought Payton was the problem. It was the defense being hilariously inept. Some (insert favorite adjective here) fans definitely thought Payton should be fired. There were threads about it. Most fans find it far easier to blame coaches than players. Probably because they don't buy MM or Payton jerseys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted November 18, 2018 Author Share Posted November 18, 2018 39 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: Nobody is wrong here. It's not necessarily a mistake to keep McCarthy. He can still have success. It's not necessarily a mistake to fire McCarthy. A different head coach could do better. I just wish both sides understood that. Nobody in this argument is 100% right. I'm firmly in this camp as well. I trust the FO not to stupidly move on, but if they identify someone they like better I trust their judgment too. Change for the sake of change like many here want is silly though. But evidence suggests there are good decision makers in charge in GB so I'm relatively indifferent regarding MMs stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{Family Ghost} Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 33 minutes ago, incognito_man said: I'm firmly in this camp as well. I trust the FO not to stupidly move on, but if they identify someone they like better I trust their judgment too. Change for the sake of change like many here want is silly though. But evidence suggests there are good decision makers in charge in GB so I'm relatively indifferent regarding MMs stay. We have high quality guys in charge of things .. Murphy might look a little dopey, but he's a really sharp football man. Gute probably knows who's who when it comes to the brightest minds in the game. The Packers should have their pick of the litter when it comes to HC candidates if they decide to do that route. It's a great situation for prospective HC's. I think McCarthy is completely played out in GB, so I'd be shocked at this point if he was retained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Trace Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Outpost31 said: Lots of people gonna look silly when we win the Super Bowl against all odds this year. I'm gonna love it. I'm going to troll the hell out of all of you and you'll all be okay with it because we will have just won the Super Bowl and you'll be too busy being happy to be mad at me trolling the hell out of you for being wrong about McCarthy. Ya man, nothing quite as satisfying as trolling people who could not care less about it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Trace Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 1 hour ago, Outpost31 said: Nobody is wrong here. It's not necessarily a mistake to keep McCarthy. He can still have success. It's not necessarily a mistake to fire McCarthy. A different head coach could do better. I just wish both sides understood that. Nobody in this argument is 100% right. This is a cop-out. We will never know the outcome of the thing that we do not do, but we will know the outcome of the thing that we do do (lol dudu). When we make an incorrect decision, then virtually everyone will agree it was the wrong decision, but the aim is to avoid making that decision in favor of one that will be (relatively) better, and yet one that the naysayers will nonetheless question. So no, there *is* a (relative) correct and incorrect decision. It's like when Skip Bayless insisted that trading Favre was a mistake even after we won the SuperBowl with Rodgers by arguing that if we kept Favre, we would have won a SuperBowl the next year... even though Favre did not do that for his own team that year, or any team thereafter. Nobody can disprove his assertion, so he could have been correct, but... somehow I doubt very many of us regret the outcome that *is* knowable to us. At this point, we have hit a wall, and have to be willing to risk making the wrong move -- even if it means getting worse -- if we want to get better. Fortune favors the bold, and right now, that means FIRE MAC!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 2 hours ago, Outpost31 said: Nobody is wrong here. It's not necessarily a mistake to keep McCarthy. He can still have success. It's not necessarily a mistake to fire McCarthy. A different head coach could do better. I just wish both sides understood that. Nobody in this argument is 100% right. We never win another Super Bowl with McCarthy. There is no reasonable argument to the contrary. The man is so stubborn and his offense is so outdated it's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 Just now, Golfman said: We never win another Super Bowl with McCarthy. There is no reasonable argument to the contrary. The man is so stubborn and his offense is so outdated it's ridiculous. Saints fans said the same thing about Payton. I have frequently said that it could be the right decision to fire McCarthy. I don't think it is, but I have allowed that it is possible. Are you saying that you know beyond a shadow of doubt - BEYOND A SHADOW OF DOUBT - that McCarthy will never win another Super Bowl? Surely there must be somebody willing to bet you on that, right? If you are beyond a shadow of doubt convinced you are right, well, I'd put some money on that if I were you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnar Danneskjold Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 I wanted to flesh out the analytics issue a little more: Some rates that may be relevant: Packers 4th down conversion rate in 2018: 0.364 Drives for the Packers of 29 yds or more in Seattle game: (6/11) 0.545 Seattle drives that failed to get a first down prior to the 4th down play: (6/11) 0.545 Seattle kicker results between 40 and 50 yds: 5/6 (0.83) so, in an over simplified version using likely non-valid assumptions that the numbers hold in this game situation and field position. The teams would have better situational numbers. If we went for it, the numbers would suggest that the odds of getting into field goal range or better would be 0.364 * 0.545 = 0.198 or 19.8% The odds of success on forth down and not getting into field goal position without another 4th down = 0.364*0.455= 0.166 or 16.6% The odds of failing on 4th and holding Seattle to no score would be 0.636*0.545*0.17 = .059 or 5.9% The odds of failing on 4th and holding Seattle to a field goal = 0.636*0.545*0.83 = 0.288 or 28.8% The odds of failing on forth and Seattle getting a first down or better: 0.636*0.455= 0.289 or 28.9% Odds of punting and holding them without a first down, then driving to within field goal range = 0.545 * 0.545 = 0.297 or 29.7 % By crude metrics, it is plausible that analytics, or "going by the numbers" the best decision is to punt. 29.7% success vs 19.8% (plus a little due to further successful 4th down conversions) Even if we bump up the 4th down conversion rate to 50%, the numbers come out close to even between the two options. Obviously, the teams have better access to data, especially situational data since even with something like 4th down conversions they know what their success rate is, what Seattle's rate of stopping 4th down is, and the data is broken down by play type, field position, game situation, etc which is beyond the scope of this forum. Because of the small sample sizes involved, the rates I have used here may not be the best, and I admit that. I am not saying that this is the be all and end all analysis, simply that it is plausible that the true analytics show punting to be the call, and the issue then becomes should those be ignored based on the situation at hand being sufficiently different that analytics no longer apply. I still think that the correct situation was to go for it, based on the game situation of defensive injuries and momentum, but had McCarthy done that, it is possible that it is the "gut" reaction not supported by the numbers. I would love to have NFL quality data to evaluate this better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 I think everybody can agree when gut instinct and heart and feel of the game was considered, going for it was the right decision. I also wish more people could agree that the analytics could have dictated they punt and that McCarthy isn't some liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnar Danneskjold Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 1 minute ago, Outpost31 said: I think everybody can agree when gut instinct and heart and feel of the game was considered, going for it was the right decision. I also wish more people could agree that the analytics could have dictated they punt and that McCarthy isn't some liar. That is the point I am trying to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 Just now, Ragnar Danneskjold said: That is the point I am trying to make. That's why I echoed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Anonymous Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 I may have missed it but not once in that novel-length post was time remaining or number of timeouts mentioned. Those are kind of the most important considerations in that situation. All those numbers thrown out there by the post author and nothing specific to the situation. Math doesn't lie, McCarthy does though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 32 minutes ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said: I still think that the correct situation was to go for it, based on the game situation of defensive injuries and momentum, but had McCarthy done that, it is possible that it is the "gut" reaction not supported by the numbers. I would love to have NFL quality data to evaluate this better. This is why the call to go for it was a no-brainer. This isnt Madden where you just go off variable-less numbers or "analytics." Seattle having the No. 1 rush offense matters. Packers not having Daniels or Clark matters. Packers having 1 timeout matters. Seattle having a mobile QB matters. Needing only 2 yards matters. Being down 3 (so giving up 3 still keeps us alive) matters. The "circumstances" of that particular situation should have led to the conclusion that the "only" decision was to go for it. Way beyond a gut feeling. Pure logic based on the present variables at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 33 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: I think everybody can agree when gut instinct and heart and feel of the game was considered, going for it was the right decision. I also wish more people could agree that the analytics could have dictated they punt and that McCarthy isn't some liar. Actually I dont agree with that and I've never thought MM lied. In a world where BB tells no truths - I dont pay attention to coach-speak all that much. Besides, whats said after the fact has no bearing on the events (and decisions) of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.