GDT Week 10: Packers vs. Panthers (Martinez on an Island Edition)

[packfanfb]

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

It was sad seeing 87 out there and it not being Jordy Nelson.  

So far, our new 87 and 52 are a little far off the pace of their predecessors. 

[MacReady]

Just now, packfanfb said:

So far, our new 87 and 52 are a little far off the pace of their predecessors. 

I don't even get in on the 52 conversation.  You know why?  Damn it, now I'm getting into the 52 conversation.  Standby. 

[Dubz41]

8 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Why would you run a play with an expected outcome of 3 points versus an expected outcome of 4.4ish?

"Always take the points" is a broken narrative relic of a league when games regularly ended in scores of 13-9.

+1.

Did not mind the decision at all, BUT you don't run that play with your two most dynamic players on the bench.  I'm sorry, but that was a crappy call.  You have a HOF QB, you have an emerging all pro RB and a WR who is the TD leader over the last three years and you don't utilize any of them?  Sorry, MLF left the tool box shut on that one. Also would have helped if we didn't whiff on the block (looking at you Bak).

[packfanfb]

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

I don't even get in on the 52 conversation.  You know why?  Damn it, now I'm getting into the 52 conversation.  Standby. 

The whole thing went awry when Gary took #52. Should have kept Matthews and gave Gary #53. He's more of a Nick Perry replacement anyways. 

[Leader]

8 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

It was sad seeing 87 out there and it not being Jordy Nelson.  

Jordy's gone and enjoying fishing trips and time with his family. I was glad to see Sternberger on the field with the game on the line. Experience matters - so glad to see him getting it. Didnt see a stat for him - so he's not contributing yet - but that will come.

[packfanfb]

1 minute ago, Leader said:

Jordy's gone and enjoying fishing trips and time with his family. I was glad to see Sternberger on the field with the game on the line. Experience matters - so glad to see him getting it. Didnt see a stat for him - so he's not contributing yet - but that will come.

Actually saw Sternberger make a few nice blocks out there to spring some bigger runs. Hopefully they use the Bye week to work him into the passing game a bit more. 

[Leader]

4 minutes ago, Dubz41 said:

Did not mind the decision at all, BUT you don't run that play with your two most dynamic players on the bench.  I'm sorry, but that was a crappy call.  You have a HOF QB, you have an emerging all pro RB and a WR who is the TD leader over the last three years and you don't utilize any of them?  Sorry, MLF left the tool box shut on that one. Also would have helped if we didn't whiff on the block (looking at you Bak).

This is what turned the play and put the go / no go decision into question. He makes that block.....better than even chance we score there. Cant figure all contingencies from the sidelines.

Edited November 11, 2019 by Leader

[packfanfb]

Unless, he was hurt, absolutely no reason to give MVS only 11 snaps and Allison 42. I don't care if MVS gets 0 targets, his mere presence on the field given his speed makes him a bigger asset than Allison. 

BTW -- Allison had 3 rec for 6 yards in 42 snaps. 

Edited November 11, 2019 by packfanfb

[AlexGreen#20]

12 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

No more broken than simply going by analytics. Situations matter in the NFL. You're at home, up 4 , last play of the half, and get the ball to start the second half. I'm taking the points there. 

A FG turns a 1 possession game into a 1 possession game. 

From an expected points analytics perspective, going for it was the right call.

From a situational win percentage analytics, going for it was the right call. 

[packfanfb]

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

A FG turns a 1 possession game into a 1 possession game. 

From an expected points analytics perspective, going for it was the right call.

From a situational win percentage analytics, going for it was the right call. 

I'd agree if Carolina was getting the ball. You're betting on your offense to score on that first drive of the 2nd half. Even a FG turns the game into a 2 possession lead, as opposed to a 1 possession game because you left that same 3 points on the table at the end of the half. I don't necessarily disagree with your overall analysis, but the variable of "we get the ball first" in the 2nd half flips it for me in that situation. 

[Leader]

3 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

A FG turns a 1 possession game into a 1 possession game. 

From an expected points analytics perspective, going for it was the right call.

From a situational win percentage analytics, going for it was the right call. 

And from my perspective, it was the right call.

The Trifecta of Perfection

[waterfish_21]

2 hours ago, Mazrimiv said:

At the time, I thought the decision to go for the TD before the half was MLF taking the opportunity to show the team that they were the now the kind of team that isn't afraid to take a risk because he believes in their ability to succeed in that situation.  They failed on that specific play, but point made.

Then MLF decided to punt on 4th and 3 from the CAR 38 late in Q4, so now I don't know what to think.

The inexcusable delay of game by Rodgers a couple plays earlier probably didn't do anything to inspire MLF's confidence in how the offense was performing at the time. 

It so simple anyone can understand...

You go for the TD because he wants to show he has confidence in the offense to get it.  He doesn't go for it on 4th and 3 because he has no confidence in whether they can get it, or wait is he saying he has confidence in the defence to get a stop to win the game?  If he goes for it does he also say he has no confidence in the special teams to make a play?  

On a serious note, wtf is with this confidence crap.  Play for the win, make the correct move.  The reason behind the move is more important than creating false confidence.

[Leader]

18 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Unless, he was hurt, absolutely no reason to give MVS only 11 snaps and Allison 42. I don't care if MVS gets 0 targets, his mere presence on the field given his speed makes him a bigger asset than Allison. 

I think the coaching staff may be tiring of MVS's "less than refined" pass catching techniques. Allison and Kumerow arent going to run past people - but they'll get their hands on the ball and catch it with greater frequency than MVS has been showing.

PS and early season games are over. They all count more now (figuratively speaking....) - so we need our producers on the field.

Edited November 11, 2019 by Leader

[AlexGreen#20]

1 minute ago, packfanfb said:

I'd agree if Carolina was getting the ball. You're betting on your offense to score on that first drive of the 2nd half. Even a FG turns the game into a 2 possession lead, as opposed to a 1 possession game because you left that same 3 points on the table at the end of the half. I don't necessarily disagree with your overall analysis, but the variable of "we get the ball first" in the 2nd half flips it for me in that situation. 

We only score on 40% of our drives this season. You can't assume you're going to score on that drive.

[waterfish_21]

9 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Unless, he was hurt, absolutely no reason to give MVS only 11 snaps and Allison 42. I don't care if MVS gets 0 targets, his mere presence on the field given his speed makes him a bigger asset than Allison. 

BTW -- Allison had 3 rec for 6 yards in 42 snaps. 

Allison just doesn't seem to have a fit in this offense.  I think he's a better run blocker from the slot compared to MVS, but I think MVS can do a lot of other things better.