the green bay packers vefrsus the detroit loins 2019 MNF (week 5): the return of the incomparable tony brown PART DEUX

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

1 minute ago, Nick_gb said:

There's no guarantee they would have won. 

Correct. I completely agree, and I've stated as much over and over again. Zero guarantee.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

1 minute ago, KFP7 said:

I could be wrong here, but the Kerryon incompletion was considered the correct call even though the rule of a catch is still stupid.  He didn't get three steps with control.  Yes the calls hurt the Lions but other than those two big plays your offense could not do anything.  

Yeah, I don't disagree either. The Kerryon play was close, and was likely ruled correctly in the end. My only point was that, when one team has drives cut short with close calls, and the other has drives extended with close calls, it has an impact on some of the key stats.

As for the "offense could not do anything": eh. I think it's a matter of the team playing too conservatively. The Packers held a lead in this game for 0 seconds. I don't think they felt a need in taking unnecessary risks, and events at the end showed that such a strategy may have been a mistakes.

[Striker]

15 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Great post, great points.

I could look it up... but I've looked up so much nonsense over the last few hours and decided not to. You're right: statistically, the Packers were superior in most categories.

That being said, I think this provokes another conversation, and one that some might call "whining". In my opinion, the Lions had key drives stopped with questionable officiating decisions, while the Packers had drives extended by penalties. (The Kerryon incompletion and the missed DPI were both on 3rd down, and both ended drives.) No, the calls weren't the reason that we lost, but those calls matter in terms of yards, TOP, first downs, etc.

I'm not sure about you, but I would never draw a statistical argument without looking up those numbers. Regardless of how exhausted by nonsense I am.

We can play "bad/missed calls happen" all day. The Kerryon Johnson TD that also wasn't getting overturned if it was ruled the other way initially. The missed DPI on Aaron Jones. But those happened earlier in the game so they don't stick in memory despite that those calls/non-calls could have altered the flow of the game completely.

Packers likely had two big DPIs missed vs. the Eagles. Sucks that they didn't call them, but then they probably shouldn't have allowed 176 yards rushing and turned the ball over twice.

Until they invent robots with perfect judgement, the human error element is going to be a part of the game for better and worse. Sometimes there's something so egregious or just outright stupid (The horrible weekend officiating capped off with the Fail Mary or the Megatron catch rule) that it needs to be addressed immediately. But, outside of those instances, we have to focus on how we can put ourselves in a position where human variance won't influence the outcome.

Edited October 16, 2019 by Striker

[KFP7]

4 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Yeah, I don't disagree either. The Kerryon play was close, and was likely ruled correctly in the end. My only point was that, when one team has drives cut short with close calls, and the other has drives extended with close calls, it has an impact on some of the key stats.

As for the "offense could not do anything": eh. I think it's a matter of the team playing too conservatively. The Packers held a lead in this game for 0 seconds. I don't think they felt a need in taking unnecessary risks, and events at the end showed that such a strategy may have been a mistakes.

Agreed that the calls throughout the game hurt the Lion's statistics.  

If the game-plan switched to conservative at 13-0 then you need to fire every coach on the staff.  It's not like you were up 30.   

[Striker]

Just now, KFP7 said:

Agreed that the calls throughout the game hurt the Lion's statistics.  

If the game-plan switched to conservative at 13-0 then you need to fire every coach on the staff.  It's not like you were up 30.   

[KFP7]

Just now, Striker said:

That's a high quality image!

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

1 minute ago, KFP7 said:

Agreed that the calls throughout the game hurt the Lion's statistics.  

If the game-plan switched to conservative at 13-0 then you need to fire every coach on the staff.  It's not like you were up 30.   

Nah, not that early. I just think that they felt they were in control and didn't need to force a mistake.

[incognito_man]

2 minutes ago, KFP7 said:

That's a high quality image!

of a high quality man

(said no HS basketball ref ever)

Edited October 16, 2019 by incognito_man

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

That is way too much Mike McCarthy in my life.

[Striker]

Just now, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Nah, not that early. I just think that they felt they were in control and didn't need to force a mistake.

Which is weird since you'd think Patricia would have learned from the Bill Belichick University of Bury Opponents Until You Run Out of Digits on the Scoreboard.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

6 minutes ago, Striker said:

But, outside of those instances, we have to focus on how we can put ourselves in a position where human variance won't influence the outcome.

See, this is one area where I've always felt differently.

I don't think that a team should play a certain way because refs might make mistakes. Look at any last second FG win in NFL history, then add a bad penalty before the kick and end the game right there. It wouldn't be fair, and it's not the way this game should be. The NFL should constantly strive to remove this influence.

One solution would be to make absolutely everything reviewable. Teams still have 2+1 challenges, so that doesn't change. In this instance, with less than 2 mintues left, the penalty would have been reviewed and overturned, removing this bad call from the scheme of the game. That's one improvement that I've always felt that the NFL should consider.

[Striker]

12 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

See, this is one area where I've always felt differently.

I don't think that a team should play a certain way because refs might make mistakes. Look at any last second FG win in NFL history, then add a bad penalty before the kick and end the game right there. It wouldn't be fair, and it's not the way this game should be. The NFL should constantly strive to remove this influence.

One solution would be to make absolutely everything reviewable. Teams still have 2+1 challenges, so that doesn't change. In this instance, with less than 2 mintues left, the penalty would have been reviewed and overturned, removing this bad call from the scheme of the game. That's one improvement that I've always felt that the NFL should consider.

Well, the only "certain way" you can play is by playing a good game and not making stupid mistakes. Missing opportunities increases the odds of some random stroke of luck hurting you.

You simply won't be able to remove that human error element from ANY sport unless you create a rulebook that has zero judgement calls and has a playing space covered in cameras. 

You'd have to temper making everything reviewable. Being able to review every single play for a hold? Or any other kind of potential penalty? It would be absurd.

The better fix would be a focus on improving the quality of officiating. The problem is the NFL is bleeding officials due to retirement and doesn't seem to have a great pipeline for replacements. And they keep losing heads of officiating/replacements to the broadcast booth/studios.

Edited October 16, 2019 by Striker

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

3 minutes ago, Striker said:

Well, the only "certain way" you can play is by playing a good game and not making stupid mistakes. Missing opportunities increases the odds of some random stroke of luck hurting you.

You simply won't be able to remove that human error element from ANY sport unless you create a rulebook that has zero judgement calls and has a playing space covered in cameras. 

You'd have to temper making everything reviewable. Being able to review every single play for a hold? Or any other kind of potential penalty? It would be absurd.

The better fix would be a focus on improving the quality of officiating. The problem is the NFL is bleeding officials due to retirement and doesn't seem to have a great pipeline for replacements. And they keep losing heads of officiating/replacements to the broadcast booth/studios.

They can fix some of that by increasing the pay.  They won't do it, but they certainly have the money.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

1 minute ago, Striker said:

Well, the only "certain way" you can play is by playing a good game. Missing opportunities increases the odds of some random stroke of luck hurting you.

You simply won't be able to remove that human error element from ANY sport unless you create a rulebook that has zero judgement calls and is covered in cameras. 

You'd have to temper making everything reviewable. Being able to review every single play for a hold? Or any other kind of potential penalty? It would be absurd. Improving the quality of officiating will solve a lot of this. The problem is the NFL is bleeding officials due to retirement. And they keep losing heads of officiating/replacements to the broadcast booth/studios.

Sure, it sounds great, but it isn't a solution and it doesn't fix anything. "Just play a good game and the bad calls wont hurt you." Then you've got situations where both teams play well and the refs still influence the outcome. The issue here is bad calls and/or rules that fail to minimize them.

I don't want to remove all human error. I completely understand subjectivity, and I think it has a place in sports. That being said, if every single person can look at a game ending call and state definitively that it was a bad call, the league should do what they can to try and prevent that situation.

I didn't specify, so fair enough. I, of course, wouldn't want open-ended challenges, but I do think that a team should be able to challenge whatever they'd like, so long as it's a specific event. (Challenging a specific hold, not any hold that may have occurred on a given play.) In addition, with less than two minutes left in the game, the league would only review glaringly missed calls or confirm penalties made. In this case, such a structure would have likely prevented what happened during this game from taking place. (Note: Belichick has been pushing this for years.)

[Leader]

13 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Sure, it sounds great, but it isn't a solution and it doesn't fix anything. "Just play a good game and the bad calls wont hurt you." Then you've got situations where both teams play well and the refs still influence the outcome. The issue here is bad calls and/or rules that fail to minimize them.

I don't want to remove all human error. I completely understand subjectivity, and I think it has a place in sports. That being said, if every single person can look at a game ending call and state definitively that it was a bad call, the league should do what they can to try and prevent that situation.

I didn't specify, so fair enough. I, of course, wouldn't want open-ended challenges, but I do think that a team should be able to challenge whatever they'd like, so long as it's a specific event. (Challenging a specific hold, not any hold that may have occurred on a given play.) In addition, with less than two minutes left in the game, the league would only review glaringly missed calls or confirm penalties made. In this case, such a structure would have likely prevented what happened during this game from taking place. (Note: Belichick has been pushing this for years.)

Geeezzzzz TL. Is there a bottom to all this?